Challenges in simulation of aerodynamics, hydrodynamics, and mooring-line dynamics of floating offshore wind turbines

Proceedings of the International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 421-428

  Matha, Denis ^a   Schlipf, Markus ^a   Cordle, Andrew ^b   Pereira, Ricardo ^b   Jonkman, Jason ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STUTTGART   (Germany)

^b DNV GL   (Norway)

^c NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aerodynamics; CFD; Computational fluid dynamics; Floating wind turbine; Hydrodynamics; Integrated design tools; MBS; Mooring system; Multibody simulation; Offshore; Potential flow

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID; FLOATING WIND TURBINE; INTEGRATED DESIGN TOOLS; MBS; MOORING SYSTEM; MULTIBODY SIMULATIONS; OFFSHORE;

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS; DESIGN; DYNAMICS; HYDRODYNAMICS; MOORING; POTENTIAL FLOW; WIND TURBINES;

AERODYNAMICS;

EID: 80052770861     PISSN: 10986189     EISSN: 15551792     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (18)

1. Cordle, A, and Jonkman, J (2011). State of the Art in Floating Wind Turbine Design Tools. GL Garrad Hassan, ISOPE 2011.
2. DLR Braunschweig (2007). FLOWer: Installation and User Manual of FLOWer MAIN version FLOWer 1-2007.1.
3. International Electrotechnical Commission (2009). IEC 61400-3, Wind Turbines-Part 3: Design Requirements for Offshore Wind Turbines.
4. Jonkman, J (November 2007). Dynamics Modeling and Loads Analysis of an Offshore Floating Wind Turbine. NREL/TP-500-41958. Golden, CO.
5. Jonkman, J, and Matha, D (2011). "Dynamics of offshore floating wind turbines - analysis of three concepts," NREL, Wind Energy Journal, DOI: 10.1002/we.442 2011.
6. Jonkman, J, and Musial, W (2010). Final Technical Report, IEA Wind Task 23, Subtask 2, Offshore Code Comparison Collaboration (OC3), International Energy Agency (IEA), IEA Wind Task 23, Offshore Wind Technology and Deployment.
7. Kreuzer, E, and Wilke, U (2002). "Mooring Systems-A Multibody Dynamic Approach," Technical University Hamburg-Harburg, Multibody System Dynamics, Vol 8.
8. Lucas, J (January 2011). Comparison of First and Second-Order Hydrodynamic Results for Floating Offshore Wind Structures, GL Garrad Hassan, Report Ref: 11594br02a.
9. Matha, D (2009). Model Development and Loads Analysis of an Offshore Wind Turbine on a Tension Leg Platform, with a Comparison to Other Floating Turbine Concepts. NREL/TP-500-45891. Golden, CO.
10. Matha, D, Hauptmann, S, Hecquet, T, and Kühn, M (2010). Methodology and Results of Loads Analysis of Wind Turbines with Advanced Aeroelastic Multi-Body Simulation, DEWEK, Bremen, Germany.
11. Meister, K, Lutz, T, and Krämer, E (2010). Consideration of Unsteady Inflow Conditions in Wind Turbine CFD Simulations, DEWEK, Bremen, Germany, 2010.
12. Östergaard and Schellin.(1987). Comparison of experimental and theoretical wave actions on floating compliant offshore structures. Applied Ocean Research 9, 192-213
13. Robertson, A, and Jonkman, J (2011). Loads Analysis of Several Offshore Floating Wind Turbine Concepts. NREL, ISOPE 2011.
14. Sebastian, T, and Lackner, M (2010). A Comparison of First-Order Aerodynamic Analysis Methods for Floating Wind Turbines, 48th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, Florida, 2010.
15. Sebastian, T, and Lackner, M (2011). Offshore Foating Wind Turbines - An Aerodynamic Perspective, 49th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Orlando, Florida, 2011.
16. SIMPACK (2010). "SIMPACK Reference Guide," SIMDOC v8.904.
17. Söding, H (2010). "Boundary Element Methods for Seakeeping," Technical University Hamburg-Harburg, Duisburg, Contribution to the Lectures on Seakeeping and Sea Loads.
18. Streiner, S, Hauptmann, S, Kühn, M, and Krämer, E (2008). Coupled Fluid-Structure Simulations of a Wind Turbine Rotor, University Stuttgart, DEWEK