Engineering topics

Wendt, Fabian

Publications and source records attributed to Wendt, Fabian.

6 records

DOE OSTI2022

OC6 Phase Ia Definition Document: Validation of Nonlinear Hydrodynamic Loading on the DeepCwind Semisubmersible

The objective of OC6 Phase I is to investigate the persistent under-prediction (about 20% on average) of the structural loads in the OC5-DeepCwind floating semisubmersible wind system, as observed within the previous OC5 Phase II project. The OC5 results indicate that much of this under-prediction originates from the low-frequency response of the system at the surge/pitch natural frequencies, resulting from nonlinear hydrodynamic loading and/or overprediction of hydrodynamic damping. This work package therefore focuses on better understanding this low-frequency response behavior, the applicability of computational-fluid-dynamics (CFD) models and engineering-level hydrodynamic models for predicting the nonlinear hydrodynamic loading, and the level of uncertainty in the measured response characteristics. To address these objectives, two experimental campaigns were developed and performed in 2017 and 2018 by a sub-group of the OC5 project: Floating test campaign: A simplified OC5-DeepCwind semisubmersible model (no turbine, rigid tower) was moored to three taut-spring lines and subjected to motion decay and wave tests (regular and irregular waves), during which motion amplitudes of the model were measured (see Figure 1a). The purpose of this test campaign was to examine the repeatability of the low-frequency response of the system to wave excitation and determine the level of uncertainty in the response behavior.Constrained test campaign: The same model, but without the tower present, was fixed to a carriage and subjected to towing, forced oscillation and wave tests (regular and irregular waves), during which forces exerted upon the model were measured (see Figure 1b). The purpose of this test campaign was to examine the hydrodynamic loading contributions by separating the wave excitation and radiation forces. Both model test campaigns were performed in the concept basin of the Maritime Research Institute Netherlands (MARIN) in Wageningen, the Netherlands and the first test was within the framework of the MARINET2 project. Both experimental campaigns were examined within Phase Ia of the OC6 project. The purpose of this report is to supply the needed information to participants of the OC6 project to build and simulate the experimental campaigns.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Validation of Numerical Models of the Offshore Wind Turbine From the Alpha Ventus Wind Farm Against Full-Scale Measurements Within OC5 Phase III

The main objective of the Offshore Code Comparison Collaboration Continuation, with Correlation (OC5) project is validation of aero-hydro-servo-elastic simulation tools for offshore wind turbines (OWTs) through comparison of simulated results to the response data of physical systems. Phase III of the OC5 project validates OWT models against the measurements recorded on a Senvion 5M wind turbine supported by the OWEC Quattropod from the alpha ventus offshore wind farm. The following operating conditions of the wind turbine were chosen for the validation: (1) idling below the cut-in wind speed, (2) rotor-nacelle assembly (RNA) rotation maneuver below the cut-in wind speed, (3) power production below and above the rated wind speed, and (4) shutdown. A number of validation load cases were defined based on these operating conditions. The following measurements were used for validation: (1) strains and accelerations recorded on the support structure and (2) pitch, yaw, and azimuth angles, generator speed, and electrical power recorded from the RNA. Strains were not directly available from the majority of the OWT simulation tools; therefore, strains were calculated based on out-of-plane bending moments, axial forces, and cross-sectional properties of the structural members. The simulation results and measurements were compared in terms of time series, discrete Fourier transforms, power spectral densities, and probability density functions of strains and accelerometers. A good match was achieved between the measurements and models setup by OC5 Phase III participants.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2019

Total experimental uncertainty in hydrodynamic testing of a semisubmersible wind turbine, considering numerical propagation of systematic uncertainty

Quantifying the uncertainty in experimental results is a vital step in properly validating numerical simulation tools for designing floating wind turbines; without a good understanding of the experimental uncertainties, it is impossible to confirm if numerical simulation tools can capture the physics with acceptable accuracy. Recent validation studies suggest that the wave-induced, low-frequency surge and pitch motions of semisubmersible-type floating wind turbines are consistently underpredicted by numerical simulations, but it has not been possible to state whether or not this underprediction is within the level of experimental error. Here, previously assessed systematic uncertainty components in hydrodynamic tests of the OC5-DeepCwind semisubmersible are propagated to response metrics of interest using numerical simulation tools, and combined with the system's random uncertainty to obtain the total experimental uncertainty. The uncertainty in the low-frequency response metrics is found to be most sensitive to the system properties (e.g., mooring stiffness and center of gravity), and also the wave elevation. The results of the present study suggest that the underprediction of the low-frequency response behavior observed in previous validation studies is larger than the experimental uncertainty.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2019

Ocean Energy Systems Wave Energy Modelling Task: Modelling, Verification and Validation of Wave Energy Converters

The International Energy Agency Technology Collaboration Programme for Ocean Energy Systems (OES) initiated the OES Wave Energy Conversion Modelling Task, which focused on the verification and validation of numerical models for simulating wave energy converters (WECs). The long-term goal is to assess the accuracy of and establish confidence in the use of numerical models used in design as well as power performance assessment of WECs. To establish this confidence, the authors used different existing computational modelling tools to simulate given tasks to identify uncertainties related to simulation methodologies: (i) linear potential flow methods; (ii) weakly nonlinear Froude–Krylov methods; and (iii) fully nonlinear methods (fully nonlinear potential flow and Navier–Stokes models). This article summarizes the code-to-code task and code-to-experiment task that have been performed so far in this project, with a focus on investigating the impact of different levels of nonlinearities in the numerical models. Two different WECs were studied and simulated. The first was a heaving semi-submerged sphere, where free-decay tests and both regular and irregular wave cases were investigated in a code-to-code comparison. The second case was a heaving float corresponding to a physical model tested in a wave tank. We considered radiation, diffraction, and regular wave cases and compared quantities, such as the WEC motion, power output and hydrodynamic loading.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2019

An approach for shear-stress based scour prediction

Scour beneath seafloor pipelines, cables, and other offshore infrastructure is a well-known problem. Recent interest in seafloor mounted wave energy converters brings another dynamic element into the traditional seafloor scour problem. In this paper, we consider the M3 Wave APEX device, which utilizes airflow between two flexible chambers to generate electricity from waves. In an initial at-sea deployment of a demonstration/experimental APEX in September 2014 off the coast of Oregon, scour beneath the device was observed. As sediment from the beneath the device was removed by scour, the device's pitch orientation was shifted. This change in pitch orientation caused a degradation in power performance. Characterizing the scour associated with seafloor mounted wave energy conversion devices such as the M3 device is the objective of the present work.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2018

KiteFAST

KiteFAST is a simulator for airborne wind energy systems based on NREL's OpenFAST whole turbine simulator. KiteFAST is a multi-physics engineering tool for modeling the coupled aero-servo-elastic dynamics of airborne wind energy systems i.e. a wind-energy kite. The engineering model is like NREL's OpenFAST tool for land-based or offshore horizontal-axis wind turbines atop towers, in that KiteFAST models the important physical phenomena and system couplings, including the wind/aerodynamic excitation and full-system dynamics response (fuselage, wings, tail, stabilizers, pylons, nacelles, rotors, tether, ground station, control surfaces, and controller) under both normal (for fatigue) and extreme (for ultimate) loading conditions. The configuration of the wind-energy kite is assumed to have one fuselage; two wings (starboard, port) attached to the fuselage; one vertical stabilizer attached the fuselage; two horizontal stabilizers (starboard, port) attached to the vertical stabilizer; one or more pylons per wing, each with two rotors (top, bottom); one ground-station-fixed tether with a bridal connection to the wings, and nominal circular motion of the energy kite in the port (left) direction. The general configuration of the control surfaces assumes one or more flaps per wing, two rudders on the vertical stabilizer, two elevators per horizontal stabilizer, and rotors with variable speed and rotor-collective blade pitch. KiteFAST was developed from (1) the existing MBDyn open-source multi-body dynamics code; (2) the existing/modified OpenFAST modules NWTC Subroutine Library, AirfoilInfo, InflowWind, MoorDyn, and TurbSim; and (3) new source code for a) generating MBDyn models of the energy kite (KiteMBDyn Preprocessor), b) computing quasi-steady energy-kite aerodynamics (KiteAeroDyn, KiteAeroDyn Driver, KiteVSM, ActuatorDisk), c) interfacing an energy-kite controller, and d) coupling the various KiteFAST modules together (KiteFASTMBD).

Jonkman, Jason↗