Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
e-mail: maeda@mach.mie-u.ac.jp
Yasunari Kamada
e-mail: kamada@mach.mie-u.ac.jp
Jun Suzuki
e-mail: jun@fel.mach.mie-u.ac.jp
Hideyasu Fujioka
e-mail: fujioka@fel.mach.mie-u.ac.jp
Division of Mechanical Engineering,
Graduated School of Mie University,
1577 Kurimamachiya, Tsu,
Mie 514-8507, Japan
Introduction
NAL OF
Downloaded 06 Dec 2011 to 193.204.249.101. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
4500
Inlet
Azimuth Angle
Wind Turbine
2400
3600
Yaw Angle
Wind Turbine
Wind
1D
0.5
1.0
0.5 1.0
87 rpm to 352 rpm = 1.6 6.5 during the tests. Pressure data
were averaged 32 times at the same azimuth angle BIN. Azimuth
angles used in the discussion are = 0 deg, 90 deg, 180 deg, and
270 deg. The Reynolds number, which is based on the chord at the
blade tip and the tip speed, was about 2.1 105 at the optimum tip
speed ratio, = 5.20. The wind speed was measured by a Pitot
tube set upstream of the rotor in the tunnel test section. The position of the Pitot tube 1.5D upstream from the rotor was selected to represent average velocity over the test section without
the effect of the rotor induced velocity.
Axial Force Ca
Lift Cl
r/R
Chord length
m
Twist angle
deg
Airfoil
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0.0700
0.1474
0.1396
0.1318
0.1240
0.1162
0.1084
0.1006
0.0928
0.0850
18.33
12.00
8.33
5.00
4.68
2.86
1.44
0.91
0.00
Circle
DU91-W2-250
DU91-W2-250
DU93-W-210
DU93-W-210
NACA63-618
NACA63-618
NACA63-618
NACA63-215
NACA63-215
Drag Cd
Chord Line
Rotational Force
Cr
+
Rotating Plane
Downloaded 06 Dec 2011 to 193.204.249.101. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
=0
0.5
=+15
0.8
Normalized amplitude
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
120
=-15
0.4
=+30
0.3
=-30
=+45
0.2
=-45
0.1
Phase-lag [deg]
100
80
60
(a)
40
=0
0.10
=+15
0
10
20
30
Frequency [Hz]
40
50
5.1 Power Curve. Figure 6a shows the variation of the output power coefficient Cpower with respect to the tip speed ratio for
various yaw angles. As the yaw angle increases, the inflow energy
through the rotor disk will decrease. However, when the actual
wind turbine is operating under field conditions, yaw is caused by
a change in wind direction, and it is not a thing to set artificially.
Therefore, in this study, Cpower is defined based on the rotor swept
area and the mainstream wind velocity. In addition, the tip speed
ratio is defined as the ratio of the blade tip speed versus the
mainstream wind velocity.
The output performance for = 0 has the expected form. In the
region 5.2, Cpower increases as decreases. The power coefficient reaches its peak value Cpower = 0.450 at = 5.2. By decreasing , the angle of the inflow will increase. Therefore, at a certain
point, stall will appear, which explains the sudden drop of Cpower.
Of course, the power output is subjected to induction, which finally determines the effective angle of attack as well to the relative velocity. As decreases, these two effects are competing so
that there will be an optimum. In yawed conditions, as increases, maximum Cpower decreases, and so does the optimum .
At approximately = 3.8, as decreases, Cpower for = 0 suddenly drops, but at higher yaw angles, the decrease of Cpower is
reduced. The fact that the optimum moves at lower as the yaw
angle increases is because the normal to the rotor disk velocity is
proportional to cos . Furthermore, in the low tip speed ratio
region, Cpower rises with increasing . In addition, since there are
no ground effects and the inflow is uniform, the flow will be
symmetric and therefore there will be no difference in Cpower between a plus yaw angle and minus one.
Figure 7 shows the relative maximum power as function of the
yaw angle defined as the ratio of the maximum power coefficient
Cpower for each yaw angle to the maximum for = 0. A curve of
cos2 6 and cos3 7 are shown in the same figure. At optiJournal of Solar Energy Engineering
=-15
0.08
0.06
0.04
=+30
=-30
=+45
=-45
4
Tip Speed Ratio
0.02
0
-Ctorque curve
(b)
1.0
0.9
C power /Cpower 0
20
4
Tip Speed Ratio
-Cpower curve
0.8
0.7
0.6
Experiment
0.5
co s
0.4
co s
0.3
-45
2
3
-30
-15
0
+15
Yaw Angle [deg]
+30
+45
Downloaded 06 Dec 2011 to 193.204.249.101. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
0.4
0.2
0.0
=0
=+15
-0.2
Fig. 8 Comparison of the pressure distribution at = 0 for
various yaw angles r / R = 0.7
4
Tip Speed Ratio
=+30
=+45
6
(a)
=+15
=+30
=+45
1.0
(b)
4
Tip Speed Ratio
-Ca curve (=0)
Fig. 10 Rotational and axial force coefficients at = 0 for various yaw angles r / R = 0.7: a -Cr curve = 0; b -Ca curve
= 0
is small.
Figures 10a and 10b show the -Cr and -Ca curves for
= 0. Both figures correspond to r / R = 0.7. When = 0, and
4.0 as decreases, Cr increases and then reaches a maximum
value of Cr = 0.30 at = 4.0. In the region of 4.0, Cr drops
abruptly at = 3.8. The = 3.8 almost agrees with the at which
rotor torque drops in Fig. 6b. From Fig. 10b, when = 0, Ca
increases gently as decreases in the region of 4.5, and Ca
becomes approximately constant in the vicinity of = 4 4.5. Ca
suddenly drops in the vicinity of = 3.8, in agreement with the
value of corresponding to a sudden drop in Cr. It appears that
the reason is that the angle of attack to the blade element is large,
and the flow on the suction side is separated Fig. 11.
-6
25
=0
20
15
=+15
=+30
10
5
0
=0
1.5
0.5
Pressure Coefficien Cp
GeometricalAngleofAttack[deg]
2.0
=+45
90
180
270
Azimuth Angle [deg]
360
= 1.8
= 3.0
= 4.0
-4
-2
2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
Chord Station x/c
0.8
Downloaded 06 Dec 2011 to 193.204.249.101. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
0.4
Rotational Force Coefficient Cr
0.4
0.2
=0
0.0
- 0.2
=+15
=+30
=+45
(a)
4
Tip Speed Ratio
0.2
-0.2
=0
4
Tip Speed Ratio
-Cr curve (=90)
2.0
2.0
(b)
=+1 5
=+3 0
=+4 5
(a)
=+15
1.5
=+30
=+45
1.0
0.5
=0
0.0
4
Tip Speed Ratio
(b)
=0
=+15
=+30
1.5
=+45
1.0
0.5
4
Tip Speed Ratio
Fig. 13 Rotational and axial force coefficients at = 90 for various yaw angles r / R = 0.7: a -Cr curve = 90; b -Ca
curve = 90
Downloaded 06 Dec 2011 to 193.204.249.101. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
0
=+30
=+45
=0
=+15
2
4
Tip Speed Ratio
2.0
=0
=+15
=+30
=+45
1.5
Nomenclature
c
Ca
Cd
Cl
Cp
1.0
0.5
0
4
Tip Speed Ratio
Conclusions
Cpower
Ctorque
Cr
r
R
T
U0
x
References
Pressure Coefficient Cp
-6
=0
= 90
= 180
= 270
-4
-2
0
2
0.2
0.4
0.6
Chord Station x/c
0.8
1 Snel, H., 1998, Review of the Present Status of Rotor Aerodynamics, Wind
Energy, 1S1, pp. 4669.
2 Vermeer, L. J., Srensen, J. N., and Crespo, A., 2003, Wind Turbine Wake
Aerodynamics, Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 3967, pp. 467510.
3 Schepers, J. G., Brand, A. J., Bruining, A., Graham, J. M. R., Hand, M. M.,
Infield, D. G., Madsen, H. A., Maeda, T., Paynter, J. H., van Rooij, R.,
Shimizu, Y., Simms, D. A., and Stefanatos, N., 2002, Final Report of IEA
Annex XVIII: Enhanced Field Rotor Aerodynamics Database, ECN-C-02016, p. 353.
4 Maeda, T., Ismaili, E., Kawabuchi, H., and Kamada, Y., 2005, Surface Pressure Distribution on a Blade of a 10 m Diameter HAWT Field Measurements
Versus Wind Tunnel Measurements, ASME J. Sol. Energy Eng., 1272, pp.
185191.
5 Simms, D., Schreck, S., Hand, M., and Fingersh, L. J., 2001, NREL Unsteady
Aerodynamics Experiment in the NASA-Ames Wind Tunnel: A Comparison of
Predictions to Measurements, NREL/TP-500-29494.
6 Imamura, H., Takezaki, D., Hasegawa, Y., Kikuyama, K., and Kobayashi, K.,
2004, Numerical Analysis of a Local Angle of Attack to HAWT Rotor Blade
in Unsteady Flow Conditions, Proceedings of European Wind Energy Conference & Exhibition 2004, London, UK, CD-ROM, p. 8.
7 Pesmajoglou, S., and Graham, J. M. R., 1993, Prediction of Yaw Loads on a
Downloaded 06 Dec 2011 to 193.204.249.101. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
11 Maeda, T., Kamada, Y., Sakai, Y., and Takahara, N., 2005, Experimental
Study on Flow Around Blades of Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine in Wind
Tunnel, Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng., Ser. B, 71701, pp. 171176.
12 Maeda, T., Kamada, Y., Sakai, Y., and Takahara, N., 2005, Experimental
Study on Flow Around Blades of Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine in Wind
Tunnel Second Report Studies on the Flow Around Blade Based on Pressure
Distribution, Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng., Ser. B, 71705, pp. 13831389.
13 Amandolse, X., and Szchnyi, E., 2004, Experimental Study of the Effect
of Turbulence on a Section Model Blade Oscillating in Stall, Wind Energy,
74, pp. 267282.
Downloaded 06 Dec 2011 to 193.204.249.101. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm