CFD predictions of NREL Phase VI Rotor Experiments in NASA/AMES Wind tunnel

Abstract

This article presents the computational predictions of NREL Phase VI rotor, a stall-regulated two bladed wind turbine with full-span pitch control and a power rating of 20 kW, in the NASA/AMES  80 ft. X 120 ft. wind tunnel. A 3D CFD–RANS approach is used, modeling single blade of the rotor utilizing periodicity, in a rotating frame of reference; over several upwind cases. All the simulations are performed using the commercial multi-purpose CFD solver ANSYS CFX 12.1. The blade is modeled with simplified spherical hub excluding nacelle and tower, at stationary wind conditions neglecting wall shear effects due to tunnel blockage. The comparisons are done for the blade with 0° yaw angle and 3° tip pitch angle. Reasonably good agreement is obtained when comparing modeled mechanical effects Viz. power, thrust, and span wise force components with measurements over wind speeds ranging from 5m/s to 25m/s. The capability of CFD in predicting complex 3D wind turbine aerodynamics is demonstrated in this paper with NREL Phase VI data campaign as a case study.

Keywords

• NREL-VI Rotor; Navier–Stokes equations; Computational fluid dynamics; Wind turbine aerodynamics; Simulation.

References

1. Larsen, J., “ANSYS CFD Applied to Wind Turbines at Siemens Wind Power,” ANSYS Conference & 26th CADFEM Users’ Meeting, Darmstadt, Germany, October Standish, K., “CFD at GE”, Wind Power 2007, Los Angeles, CA, June 2007.
2. Le Pape, A., and Gleize, V., “Improved Navier-Stokes Computations of a Stall-Regulated Wind Turbine Using Low Mach Number Preconditioning,” 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 2006, AIAA 2006-1502.
3. Standish, K. J., and van Dam, C. P., “Aerodynamic Analysis of Blunt Trailing Edge Airfoils,” Journal of Solar Energy Engineering ,Vol. 125, No. 4, Nov. 2003, pp. 479-487.
4. Fuglsang, P., and Bak, C., “Development of the Risİ Wind Turbine Airfoils,” Wind Energy, Vol. 7. No. 2, May 2004, p. 145-162.
5. Xu, G. and Sankar, L., “Development of Engineering Aerodynamics methodology on the NREL Phase VI Rotor”, Wind Energy, vol. 5, no. 2-3, pp. 171-183, 2002. Flow
6. Langtry, R. B, Gola, J, and Menter, F. R, “Predicting 2D Airfoil and 3D Wind Turbine Rotor Performance using a Transition Model for General CFD Codes,” 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 2006, AIAA-2006-395.
7. Johansen J., Madsen, H. A., Sİrensen, N. N., and Bak C., “Numerical Investigation of a Wind Turbine Rotor with an Aerodynamically Redesigned Hub-Region,” 2006
8. European Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition, Athens, Greece, 2006.

9. Johansen J., and Sİrensen N. N.: “Aerodynamic investigation of winglets on wind turbine blades using CFD”, Risİ-R- 1543(EN) report 2006.
10. Hansen, M. O. L., and Johansen, J., “Tip Studies Using CFD and Comparison with Tip Loss Models,” Wind Energy, 2004, p. 343 -356.
11. Hjort, S., Laursen, J., and Enevoldsen, P., “Aerodynamic Winglet Optimization,” Sandia National Lab Blade Workshop, May 2008.
12. Duque, E. P. N., Burklund, M. D., and Johnson, W., “Navier-Stokes and comprehensive analysis performance predictions of the NREL phase VI experiment,” Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 2003; 125: 457-467.
13. Chao, D. D., and van Dam, C. P., “Computational Aerodynamic Analysis of a Blunt Trailing-edge Airfoil Modification to the NREL Phase VI Rotor,” Wind Energy, July 2007, 10:529-550. Gonzalez A., and Munduate, X., “Three- dimensional and Rotational Aerodynamics on the NREL
14. Phase VI Wind Turbine Blade,” 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 2007, AIAA 2007-0628.
15. Schmitz, S., and Chattot, J-J., “Application of a ‘Parallelized Coupled Navier-Stokes/Vortex Panel Solver’ to the NREL Phase VI Rotor,” 43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 2003, AIAA 2003-0593.
16. Zahle, F., Johansen, J., Sorenson, N., and Graham, J., “Wind Turbine Rotor-Tower Interaction Using an Incompressible Overset Grid Method,” AIAA 45th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, January 2007, AIAA 2007-0425.
17. Simms, D. A., Schreck, S., Hand, M., and Fingersh, L., J., “NREL Unsteady Aerodynamics Experiment in the NASA Ames Wind Tunnel: A Comparison of Predictions to Measurements” NREL/TP-500-29494, June 2001.
18. Sİrensen, N. N., Michelsen, J. A., and Schreck, S., “Navier-Stokes Predictions of the NREL Phase VI rotor in the NASA Ames 80ft x120 ft wind tunnel,” Wind Energy, Vol. 5, No. 2-3, 2002, pp. 151-169.
19. Johansen, J., Sİrensen, N. N., Michelsen, J. A., and Schreck, S., “Detached-Eddy Simulation of Flow around the NREL Phase-VI Rotor,” Wind Energy, Vol. 5, No. 2- , 2002, pp. 185-197. Mark A. Potsdam, Dimitri J. Mavriplis,
20. “Unstructured Mesh CFD Aerodynamic Analysis of the NREL Phase VI Rotor”, AIAA 2009-1221, 47th AIAA
21. Aerospace Sciences Meeting Including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition, 5 - 8 January , Orlando, Florida. M.M. Hand, D.A. Simms, L.J. Fingersh, D.W. Jager, J.R. Cotrell, S. Schreck, and S.M. Larwood, “Unsteady Aerodynamics Experiment Phase VI: Wind Tunnel Test Configurations and Available Data Campaigns”, NREL/TP-500-29955, December 2001.
22. Technical information regarding the ANSYS-CFX solver: solver.asp. Menter FR. Two-equation eddy-viscosity model for engineering (8):1598-1605. AIAA-Journal ;
23. Robin Langtry, Florian Menter, “Overview of Industrial Transition Modeling in CFX”, ANSYS Germany GmbH, ANSYS CFX. Jeppe Johansen and Niels N. Sİrensen, “Aerofoil Characteristics from 3D CFD Rotor Computations”, Risİ National Laboratory, PO Box 49, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark.