Publications

Results 51–75 of 123
Skip to search filters

Roughness Sensitivity Comparisons of Wind Turbine Blade Sections

Wilcox, Benjamin W.; White, Edward, B.; Maniaci, David C.

One explanation for wind turbine power degradation is insect roughness. Historical studies on insect-induced power degradation have used simulation methods which are either un- representative of actual insect roughness or too costly or time-consuming to be applied to wide-scale testing. Furthermore, the role of airfoil geometry in determining the relations between insect impingement locations and roughness sensitivity has not been studied. To link the effects of airfoil geometry, insect impingement locations, and roughness sensitivity, a simulation code was written to determine representative insect collection patterns for different airfoil shapes. Insect collection pattern data was then used to simulate roughness on an NREL S814 airfoil that was tested in a wind tunnel at Reynolds numbers between 1.6 x 106 and 4.0 x 106. Results are compared to previous tests of a NACA 633 -418 airfoil. Increasing roughness height and density results in decreased maximum lift, lift curve slope, and lift-to-drag ratio. Increasing roughness height, density, or Reynolds number results in earlier bypass transition, with critical roughness Reynolds numbers lying within the historical range. Increased roughness sensitivity on the 25% thick NREL S814 is observed compared to the 18% thick NACA 63 3 -418. Blade-element-momentum analysis was used to calculate annual energy production losses of 4.9% and 6.8% for a NACA 633 -418 turbine and an NREL S814 turbine, respectively, operating with 200 μm roughness. These compare well to historical field measurements.

More Details
TYPE SAND Report YEAR 2017
OSTIDOI

RANS Based Methodology for Predicting the Influence of Leading Edge Erosion on Airfoil Performance

Langel, Christopher M.; Chow, Raymond C.; van Dam, C.P.v.; Maniaci, David C.

The impact of surface roughness on flows over aerodynamically designed surfaces is of interested in a number of different fields. It has long been known the surface roughness will likely accelerate the laminar- turbulent transition process by creating additional disturbances in the boundary layer. However, there are very few tools available to predict the effects surface roughness will have on boundary layer flow. There are numerous implications of the premature appearance of a turbulent boundary layer. Increases in local skin friction, boundary layer thickness, and turbulent mixing can impact global flow properties compounding the effects of surface roughness. With this motivation, an investigation into the effects of surface roughness on boundary layer transition has been conducted. The effort involved both an extensive experimental campaign, and the development of a high fidelity roughness model implemented in a R ANS solver. Vast a mounts of experimental data was generated at the Texas A&M Oran W. Nicks Low Speed Wind Tunnel for the calibration and validation of the roughness model described in this work, as well as future efforts. The present work focuses on the development of the computational model including a description of the calibration process. The primary methodology presented introduces a scalar field variable and associated transport equation that interacts with a correlation based transition model. The additional equation allows for non-local effects of surface roughness to be accounted for downstream of rough wall sections while maintaining a "local" formulation. The scalar field is determined through a boundary condition function that has been calibrated to flat plate cases with sand grain roughness. The model was initially tested on a NACA 0012 airfoil with roughness strips applied to the leading edge. Further calibration of the roughness model was performed using results from the companion experimental study on a NACA 633 -418 airfoil. The refined model demonstrates favorable agreement predicting changes to the transition location, as well as drag, for a number of different leading edge roughness configurations on the NACA 633-418 airfoil. Additional tests were conducted on a thicker S814 airfoil, with similar roughness configurations to the NACA 633-418. Simulations run with the roughness model compare favorably with the results obtained in the experimental study for both airfoils.

More Details
TYPE SAND Report YEAR 2017
OSTIDOI
Results 51–75 of 123
Results 51–75 of 123