0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

4 visualizzazioni7 pagineThe purpose of this paper is to integrate the
controller design of wind turbines with
structure and aerodynamic analysis and use
the final product in the design optimization
process (DOP) of wind turbines. To do that,
the controller design is automated and
integrated with an aeroelastic simulation
tool. This integrated tool is linked with an
optimization engine. The automated
controller has two built-in control algorithms;
a generator-torque controller and an above
rated pitch-controller

Apr 28, 2015

Controller Design AutoStatic Aeroelastic Considerations for Circulation Control Airfoilsmation for Aeroservoelastic Design Optimization of Wind Turbines

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

The purpose of this paper is to integrate the
controller design of wind turbines with
structure and aerodynamic analysis and use
the final product in the design optimization
process (DOP) of wind turbines. To do that,
the controller design is automated and
integrated with an aeroelastic simulation
tool. This integrated tool is linked with an
optimization engine. The automated
controller has two built-in control algorithms;
a generator-torque controller and an above
rated pitch-controller

© All Rights Reserved

0 valutazioniIl 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (0 voti)

4 visualizzazioni7 pagineController Design AutoStatic Aeroelastic Considerations for Circulation Control Airfoilsmation for Aeroservoelastic Design Optimization of Wind Turbines

The purpose of this paper is to integrate the
controller design of wind turbines with
structure and aerodynamic analysis and use
the final product in the design optimization
process (DOP) of wind turbines. To do that,
the controller design is automated and
integrated with an aeroelastic simulation
tool. This integrated tool is linked with an
optimization engine. The automated
controller has two built-in control algorithms;
a generator-torque controller and an above
rated pitch-controller

© All Rights Reserved

Sei sulla pagina 1di 7

of Wind Turbines

Turaj Ashuri

PhD Researcher

Department of Aerodynamic and Wind Energy

Delft University of Technology

t.ashuri@tudelft.nl

Michiel Zaaijer

Assistant Professor

Department of Aerodynamic and Wind Energy

Delft University of Technology

m.b.zaayer@tudelft.nl

Professor

Department of Aerodynamic and Wind Energy

Delft University of Technology

G.J.W.vanBussel@tudelft.nl

Professor

Department of Aerodynamic and Wind Energy

Delft University of Technology

G.A.M.vanKuik@tudelft.nl

Abstract

1 Introduction

controller design of wind turbines with

structure and aerodynamic analysis and use

the final product in the design optimization

process (DOP) of wind turbines. To do that,

the controller design is automated and

integrated with an aeroelastic simulation

tool. This integrated tool is linked with an

optimization

engine.

The

automated

controller has two built-in control algorithms;

a generator-torque controller and an above

rated pitch-controller. This new tool is used

in the DOP of the 5MW NREL research wind

turbine. To show how this method works

some parameters of both the generatortorque controller and the pitch-controller are

introduced as design variables in the DOP.

As the result of changing controller related

design variables within each optimization

iteration, the values of the objective function

and the design constraint also change. This

shows that by introducing the controllers

parameters as design variables in the DOP

a more realistic assessment of the objective

function and constraints is possible that

helps the optimizer to search for better

solutions.

design. This complexity is mainly due to the

dynamic interaction of aerodynamic forces,

structural flexibility and control actions,

known as aeroservoelasticity. A good DOP

should consider this interaction from the first

iterations of the process. Usually, most of

the DOPs do not take the controller design

as part of the study and those rare cases

that include the controller in the DOP are

based on a fixed controller setting that is

developed for the initial design and tuned

during the optimization, without having the

controller parameters as design variables

[1,2].

design optimization, aeroservoelasticity

controller on the objective function and

constraints can not be evaluated properly.

This leads to a system that is not a real

optimum. Obviously, after finding the

optimum values of the other parameters of

the system, the controller needs to be

redesigned and tuned again.

To properly evaluate the objective function

and constrains, controller design should be

part of the DOP and redesigned within

optimization iterations with all its parameters

as design variables. This is a problem in

automated DOPs, which require fast

controller

design,

without

intervention of a designer.

manual

new methodology that enables the controller

design to be part of an automated DOP. It

starts with explaining different steps of

designing a torque controller for below rated

region, and a pitch controller for above rated

region as well as the transition part.

For below rated region, the generator torque

is assumed to be proportional to the square

of the filtered generator speed. For above

rated region, the periodic steady state

operating points are found and the system is

linearized around these steady state

operating points.

Based on this linearized model, the above

rated pitch controller can be designed. Then

proper parameters that influence each

controller design are selected and

introduced as design variables in the DOP.

Next, this parameterized model is

automated such that it can be integrated

with the rest of the DOP.

Finally, this new methodology is applied on

the 5 MW research wind turbine. As the

result of changing the damping ratio, the

generator slip, structural twist of the blade,

pitch rate of the servo-motor and the

generator controller proportional gain within

optimization iterations, different values for

the objective function and the constraint

were found.

This shows that a more realistic evaluation

of the objective function and constraint is

possible with the controller design in the

loop, which leads to more reduction in the

cost of energy and a better assessment of

the constraints.

This new methodology can also be used in

up-scaling studies, in which different scales

demand for a new controller setting, either

with or without controller parameters as

in a better design solution.

2 Controller

design

implementation

and

variable

blade-pitch-to-feather

controller is selected. In such a

configuration the strategy to control the

power-production operation is based on the

design of two separable control systems:

load region

A full-span rotor-collective blade-pitch

controller for the full load region

Maximization of power production in partial

load region is the most logical strategy for

the generator torque controller [3]. As

discussed in many research papers,

variable speed operation results in a higher

energy capture than constant speed.

Therefore, a variable speed controller is

also used in this research.

The generator torque controller consists of

five different regions, see figure 1. In region

1, which is below the cut-in wind speed, the

generator torque is zero and the kinetic

energy in the wind is used to accelerate the

rotor.

Region 2 is the power production region, in

which the generator torque in our controller

is proportional to the square of the filtered

generator speed to keep a constant

(theoretically optimal) tip-speed ratio, that is:

T=K 2, with K as the proportionality

factor.

In region 3, the generator torque changes

inversely with generator speed to keep a

constant power output. Region 1 is a

linear transition between region 1 and 2.

45000

1 1/2

2 1/2

37500

30000

22500

15000

7500

0

0

300

600

900

1200

1500

1800

Figure 1: Generator-torque controller of the 5MW turbine in different regions

Also in region 2 a linear transition between

region 2 and 3 occurs, in which its slope is

equal to the slip of an induction generator.

The goal of the blade-pitch controller is to

regulate generator speed above the rated

operating point. The blade-pitch controller is

designed using a gain scheduled PI

controller.

The error between the filtered generator

speed and the rated generator speed is

used as the input for the PI controller. The

output of this PI-controller is the reference

pitch angle for the pitch actuator system.

A single degree of freedom model is used to

compute the proportional, KP, and integral,

KI, gains [2]. However, due to the nonlinear

characteristics of the aerodynamic forces

that change during different operating

conditions, the KP and KI gains are

scheduled as functions of the aerodynamic

pitch sensitivity.

Because of the changes of blade

parameters like twist and chord and tower

value of the rated wind speed needs to be

recalculated in each iteration. This is done

using a time domain simulation with a

steady wind at the hub height.

After finding the rated wind speed, the

system is linearized at different wind speeds

above the rated wind speed to find the

steady state operating points.

This process is mainly named as periodic

steady state linearization, since it is

performed at different blade azimuth angles

and then the azimuth averaged values are

used to design the pitch-controller [4, 5].

Using this process, the , , V space (

rotational speed, blade pitch angle and V

the wind velocity) in which the system is in

equilibrium can be mapped [6].

Based on the values in which the system is

in dynamic equilibrium, another linearization

is carried out that is mainly named as initial

steady state linearization, with previous

obtained points as the input.

sensitivity is calculated using the linearized

model with the generator degree of freedom

as the only state variable, blade pitch angle

as the input and the rotor power as the

system output.

Since the system has only one state

variable, the derivative of the system output

to the system input is the aerodynamic pitch

sensitivity to the blade pitch angle which is

equal to the transmission matrix of the

linearized system.

COE=

System cost

Anual energy production

(3)

a wind turbine is made of based on the

WindPact project [8].

The annual energy production is found by

multiplying the wind speed probability

density function (PDF) to the power curve of

the wind turbine.

integral gains can be calculated as follow

[7]:

DT

Rated

n

1 (1)

K P

P

0.5 N gear ( ) 1

k

0

and:

counting is applied on the time-series output

of the aeroelastic solver. Based on that, the

Miner rule is used to calculate the

cumulative fatigue damage at the blade

root, in flapwise direction.

2

I

DT

Rated

n

1

KI

N gear ( ) 1

k

0

(2)

Where:

IDR : drive train mass moment of inertia

Rated : rated rotational speed

: damping ratio

n : resonance frequency

: blade pitch angle

k : the blade-pitch angle at which the pitch

aerodynamic sensitivity has doubled from its

value at the rated.

In a DOP, costs of energy and fatigue

damage at the blade root are among the

most important issues to consider.

Therefore, this paper investigates the

influence of different controller parameters

on the cost of energy as the objective

function with a constraint on the fatigue

damage at the blade root.

study are as follow:

continuous variable

Generator slip in region 2 as a

discrete variable

Damping ratio as a discrete variable

Blades twist angle at different stations

as a continuous variable

Pitch rate of the servo-motor as a

discrete variable

an external master controller dynamic link

library (DLL), in the format of BLADED.

Therefore at any time during the DOP, when

there is a need to evaluate a new set of

design variables by the optimizer, this DLL

file is automatically generated and can be

used directly.

Obviously, there are other design variables

that can be changed during a DOP using

this method, and the choice of the selected

design variables in this study is to simply

show how this method works.

The DLL file is a parametric model and any

other parameter within the DLL itself can be

introduced either as a design variable or

constrained parameter in a DOP.

using FAST. The controller design

automation is carried out in MATLAB.

Therefore, an interface is developed to fully

automate the DOP to guarantee the integrity

of all the simulation tools. Sequential

quadratic programming is used as the

optimization algorithm.

The DOP is performed using the integrated

design optimization tool. To show the

influence of the selected design variables on

the objective function and constraint two

different iterations within the same DOP that

selected. The design variables for these two

different cases are as follow:

Case 1:

A generator slip of 3%, a damping ratio of

0.6, a generator proportional gain of

0.02780(kN.m/rpm2) and a servo-motor

pitch rate of 9 deg/sec

Case 2:

A generator slip of 10%, a damping ratio of

0.7, a generator proportional gain of

0.02692 (kN.m/rpm2) and a servo-motor

pitch rate of 7 deg/sec

Case 1

Case 2

0.0E+00

-2.0E+01

-4.0E+01

-6.0E+01

-8.0E+01

-1.0E+02

-1.2E+02

0

12

16

20

24

Figure 2: Aerodynamic power sensitivity to blade pitch of the 5 MW wind turbine

For the above rated pitch controller, the

aerodynamic power sensitivity to the blade

pitch for different steady state operating

points of case 1 and 2 is automatically

calculated. As figure 2 shows, this sensitivity

is different for case 1 and 2, which demands

a different controller design for the pitch

controller.

The proportional and integral gains of the

pitch controller should vary with the pitch

angle to balance the variation of the

of the rated wind speed due to the variation

of the twist angle from one iteration to the

other. This is done using the gain

scheduling technique. The calculated

proportional and integral gain for case 1 is

presented in figure 3, and is obtained using

equation 1 and 2. Case 2 has the same

pattern as case 1, but with different values.

Integral gain

Proportional gain

1

0.016

0.8

0.012

0.6

0.008

0.4

0.004

0.2

0

0.0

2.6

5.2

7.8

10.4

13.0

15.6

18.2

20.8

23.4

0.02

0

26.0

Figure 3: PI gains and gain scheduled correction factor of the 5 MW wind turbine

Cost of energy

Fatigue damage

0.25

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0

1

Case number

Figure 4: Cost of energy and flapwise fatigue damage of the 5 MW research wind turbine

correction factor should change versus the

blade pitch angle.

Based on these two cases, the cost of

energy and flapwise fatigue at the blade root

are calculated. This is presented in figure 4.

As figure 4 shows, the variation of the COE

is not too much comparing with the variation

of fatigue. This is due to the fact that the

selected design variables have more

influence on blade loads than on the system

cost and annual energy production. As

mentioned before the system cost consists

of all the elements that the wind turbine is

made of and it is not wondering that some

changes in blade parameters can not

change the COE too much.

also introduced as design variables. Then,

to show the effectiveness of the method two

different iterations in a single design

optimization run were selected and their

related objective function and constraint

were compared.

As the results show, a better assessment of

the objective function and the constraint is

achieved that helps the optimizer to move

towards a better design solution for the

system.

5 Acknowledgement

Funding for doing this PhD project came

from the SenterNovem under the frame

work of INNWIND project, which is gratefully

acknowledged.

result in different values of the objective

function and constraint, taking into account

that the change of the twist angle is tightly

bounded to see the influence of the control

parameters more.

Jason Jonkman from NREL, who took time

from his busy schedules to help us with the

linearization process in FAST.

Design Optimization of Wind Turbines,

Wind Energy journal, 2002, 5:261279

[2] M.H. Hansen and et al, Control design

for a pitch-regulated, variable speed wind

turbine, Ris-R-1500(EN), 2005

[3] K. Johnson and et al, Methods for

Increasing Region 2 Power Capture on a

Variable Speed HAWT, Proceeding of Wind

Energy Symposium, 2004, Reno, NV, pp

103-113

[4] J.M. Jonkman, M.L. Buhl,FAST user

guide, Technical Report NREL/EL-50038230, August 2005

[5] T.G. van Engelen, Control design based

on aero-hydro-servo-elastic linear models

from TURBU (ECN), EWEC conference,

2007, Italy

[6] F. D. Bianchi and et al, Wind Turbine

Control Systems Principles, Modeling and

Gain

Scheduling

Design,

Springer

publication, 2007

[7] J. Jonkman and et al, Definition of a 5MW Reference Wind Turbine for Offshore

System Development, Technical Report

NREL/TP-500-38060, 2009

[8] L. Fingersh, M. Hand, A. Laxson, Wind

Turbine Design Cost and Scaling Model,

NREL/TP-500-40566, 2006

wind turbine design has been mainly

focused on designing the controller for a

given configuration. However, the shift

towards more flexible structures equipped

with active control devices operating in the

entire working domain of the wind turbine is

changing this role.

As the design becomes more integrated

with multidisciplinary design optimization,

the design problem is changing from how do

regulate the power or decrease the loads to

how can aerodynamic, structure and active

control be optimally combined to make a

wind turbine that has the lowest COE, while

satisfying all the constraints.

This paper presented a new methodology

which enables the shifting of the wind

turbine design problems from an aeroelastic

design to an aeroservoelastic design. It

started with integrating the controller design

process with the rest of the system design

process.

References