dynamic response and control of the hywind demo floating wind turbine · 2013-10-26 · dynamic...
TRANSCRIPT
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Dynamic Response and Control of the Hywind Demo Floating Wind Turbine
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
The Hywind Concept
Main particulars for HYWIND Demo
Turbine power : 2.3 MWTurbine weight : 138 tonsDraft hull : 100 mNacelle height : 65 mRotor diameter : 82.4 mWater depth : 150–700 mDisplacement : 5300 tMooring : 3 linesDiameter at water line: 6 mDiam. submerged body: 8,3 m
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Conventional Wind Turbine Control System
0 5 10 15 20 25 300
50
100
150
200
250
300
wind speed [m/s]
thru
st fo
rce
[kN
]
• Steady state power coefficient surface and thrust force characteristics
•
• Negative damping contribution from rotor thrust force above the rated wind speed
3),(21 uACP P
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Conventional Wind Turbine Control System
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
time [s]
tow
er p
itch
angl
e [d
eg]
• Example of stable (solid line) and unstable (dashed line) behaviour of Hywind Demo with and without use of a stabilizing floater motion controller.
• Hywind Demo was shut down after 250 seconds with use of the unstable conventional controller.
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
MEASUREMENTS:
•Sea airgap.
•Sea current velocity and direction, and wave direction.
•Heave and pitch motion.
•Tower strains.
•Wind speed measurement at the nacelle.
•Nacelle yaw angle.
•Power production.
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Comparison Between Measurements and Simulations:
• Small Wave Condition
Mean wind speed 13.6 m/s
Turbulence intensity 11.4 %
Significant wave height 2.1 m
Characteristic peak period 7.7 s
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Tower Pitch Angle
frequency [Hz]
Sf [
deg2
*s]
MeasuredSimulated
Tower Pitch Angle
Mean[deg]
Std[deg]
Min[deg]
Max[deg]
Simulation 2.0 0.40 0.8 3.1
Measurement 2.0 0.31 1.1 3.7
1300 1320 1340 1360 1380 14001.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
time [s]to
wer
pitc
h an
gle
[deg
]
MeasuredSimulated
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Comparison Between Measurements and Simulations
•Moderate Wave Condition
Mean wind speed 16.8 m/s
Turbulence intensity 10.2 %
Significant wave height 3.5 m
Characteristic peak period 9.8 s
Tower Pitch Angle
Mean[deg]
Std[deg]
Min[deg]
Max[deg]
Simulation 1.6 0.47 0.0 3.1
Measurement 2.0 0.35 0.9 3.1
1200 1220 1240 1260 1280 13000.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
time [s]to
wer
pitc
h an
gle
[deg
]
MeasuredSimulated
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.30
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5Tower Pitch Angle
frequency [Hz]
Sf [
deg2
*s]
MeasuredSimulated
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Measurements: Controller Comparison – Small Wave Condition
Wind Speed Mean[m/s]
Turb[%]
Min[m/s]
Max[m/s]
Controller 1 13.6 9.3 8.0 18.9
Controller 2 13.7 8.4 8.6 17.2
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Wave elevation
frequency [Hz]
Sf [
m2 *
s]
Controller 1Controller 2
Wave Elevation Hs[m]
Tp[s]
Min[m]
Max[m]
Controller 1 2.2 7.5 -2.0 2.1
Controller 2 2.5 7.8 -2.3 2.1
• Wave and wind environment:
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20
5
10
15
20
Tower Pitch Angle
frequency [Hz]
Sf [
deg2
*s]
Controller 1Controller 2
0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
Tower Strain - Dominating Wind Direction
frequency [Hz]S
f [(
m/m
)2*s
]
Controller 1Controller 2
Tower Pitch Angle
Mean[deg]
Std[%]
Min[deg]
Max[deg]
Controller 1 -2.0 0.31 -3.7 -1.1
Controller 2 -2.2 0.47 -4.0 -0.7
Tower Strain Std[mum/m]
Min[mum/m]
Max[mum/m]
Controller 1 9.71 22.6 98.1
Controller 2 13.78 4.3 108.1
Measurements: Controller Comparison – Small Wave Condition• Dynamic responses:
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Wind Speed Mean[m/s]
Turb[%]
Min[m/s]
Max[m/s]
Controller 1 16.8 9.6 11.5 22.0
Controller 2 17.2 8.7 11.5 23.1
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.40
5
10
15
20
25
30
Wave elevation
frequency [Hz]
Sf [
m2 *
s]
Controller 1Controller 2
Wave Elevation Hs[m]
Tp[s]
Min[m]
Max[m]
Controller 1 3.8 9.5 -3.1 3.7
Controller 2 3.5 11.4 -2.7 3.0
Measurements: Controller Comparison – Moderate Wave Condition
• Wave and wind environment:
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.350
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Tower Strain - Dominating Wind Direction
frequency [Hz]S
f [(
m/m
)2 *s]
Controller 1Controller 2
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.30
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Tower Pitch Angle
frequency [Hz]
Sf [
deg2 *s
]
Controller 1Controller 2
Tower Pitch Angle
Mean[deg]
Std[deg]
Min[deg]
Max[deg]
Controller 1 -2.0 0.34 -3.1 -0.9
Controller 2 -2.1 0.42 -3.6 -0.8
Tower Strain Std [mum/m]
Min[mum/m]
Max[mum/m]
Controller 1 18.7 -16.1 120.2
Controller 2 18.5 -22.5 98.3
Measurements:Controller Comparison – Moderate Wave Condition
• Dynamic responses:
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Conclusions
•It is demonstrated that a stabilizing floater motion controller is required for a floating wind turbine.
•Simulations and measurements are compared for wind speeds above rated wind speed. Good agreement is obtained in small as well as moderate sea states.
•Two different stabilizing controllers are compared by full scale testing. A significant difference in the response at resonance is observed. This difference is important to the fatigue life of the tower.
•The range of variation of typical wind turbine parameters like rotor speed, blade pitch angle and active power production are similar to what is observed for fixed foundation wind turbines.
Classification: Internal 2011-03-14
Dynamic Response and Control of the Hywind Demo Floating Wind Turbine
Bjørn SkaarePrincipal Researcher New EnergyE-mail: [email protected], tel: +47 900 88 792www.statoil.com
Thank you!