TY - CONF A1 - Strangfeld, Christoph T1 - A brief introduction to wind turbine aerodynamics N2 - In general, wind turbines transform the kinetic energy of the wind into electric power. Thereby, the wind turbine blades are facing unsteady loads which are transferred to the hub to generate a rotation of the turbine’s axis. This brief introduction focuses on the aerodynamics of the blades and the corresponding loads. Starting with the basic flow field and loads of an airfoil, terms like stagnation point, boundary layer, Reynolds number, transition, and separation are introduced. For different geometries, lift and drag coefficient curves are discussed. Then, full wings will be considered, including their three-dimensional flow field due to wing tip vortices and crossflows. As a main source of increased loads, unsteady effects are explained in more detail such as gusts, tower passing, earth boundary layer crossing, free stream turbulences, yaw misalignment, etc. At the end, extra loads due to an oscillating free stream are introduced. T2 - QI-Digital: KI-Machbarkeitsstudie Thermografie Rotorblätter CY - Berlin, Germany DA - 13.12.2022 KW - Wind turbine KW - Nondestructive testing KW - Aerodynamics KW - Dynamic stall PY - 2022 AN - OPUS4-56728 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Müller-Vahl, H. F. A1 - Strangfeld, Christoph A1 - Nayeri, C. N. A1 - Paschereit, C. O. A1 - Greenblatt, D. T1 - Dynamic Stall Under Combined Pitching and Surging N2 - Dynamic stall often occurs under conditions of simultaneous unsteady pitching and surging (e.g., rotorcraft and wind turbines), butmanymodels employ a dimensionless time base that implicitly assumes that surging is superimposed, in a quasi-steady manner, on dynamic pitching. An unsteady wind tunnel was used to examine this assumption, where a technique was developed to quantify the unsteady effects of surging on a pitching NACA 0018 airfoil. The technique involved performing multiple harmonic pitching experiments under nominally steady freestream conditions that bracketed a corresponding 50% surging amplitude (1.25 ⋅ 105 ≤ Re ≤ 3.75 ⋅ 105). By interpolating these data, unsteady-pitching/quasi-steady-surging data sets were constructed and compared with de facto synchronous pitch and surging experiments, thereby isolating the unsteady effects of surging on a pitching airfoil. Both large and small poststall maximum angles of attack (αs + 5° and αs + 15°) were considered at multiple pitch-surge phase differences. During deep dynamic stall (αs � 15°), with large-scale separation, surging was seen to have a secondary effect on the unsteady aerodynamics. However, at small poststall maximum angles of attack (αs + 5°), either light or deep dynamic stall behavior was observed depending upon the pitch-surge phase difference. This was attributed to Reynolds number history effects, exemplified by boundary-layer transition, and thus it can be referred to as “transitional” dynamic stall. KW - Dynamic stall KW - Angle of attack oscillations KW - Free stream velocity osciallations PY - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J059153 VL - 58 IS - 12 SP - 5134 EP - 5145 PB - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AN - OPUS4-51037 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Medina, A. A1 - Ol, M. V. A1 - Greenblatt, D. A1 - Müller-Vahl, H. A1 - Strangfeld, Christoph T1 - High-Amplitude Surge of a Pitching Airfoil: Complementary Wind- and Water-Tunnel Measurements N2 - RECENT interest in gust response, rotorcraft forward flight and wind energy, among other applications, has focused on streamwise oscillations of nominally two-dimensional airfoils in attached and separated flows. The airfoil may be simultaneously held at constant incidence or execute some maneuver, such as pitch. The relative freestream is spatially uniform but temporally unsteady, and this can be accomplished in a ground-test facility in two ways. The first method is to vary the output of the prime mover, such as the rotational speed of the impeller or the blower driving a wind tunnel, or (alternatively) to vary the pressure drop in the tunnel, thereby varying the flow speed in the test section, despite nominally constant primemover revolutions per minute. The second method is used to keep the tunnel’s operating speed constant, as well as to move the test article in the streamwise direction, fore and aft (for example, via an electric linear motor), such that the relative freestream speed felt by the test article varies according to some waveform. Typically, the latter approach is chosen in water tunnels, where there is too much tunnel-circuit inertia to vary the flow speed directly but where the usually low tunnel test section flow speeds enable large excursions in the relative freestream by oscillation of the test article. In fact, outright reverse flow is possible by moving the test article in the laboratory frame at a higher speed than the water-tunnel flow speed. In either case, a sinusoidal relative-speed waveform is the most intuitively realizable, and this can be combined with similar oscillations in the airfoil incidence angle or other kinematics. Although the two methods of realizing streamwise oscillations are mechanically distinct, experimental comparisons between an oscillating test article in a water tunnel and a stationary test article in a wind tunnel with a louvermechanismhave demonstrated agreement in themeasured lift and drag histories. Such experimentswere performed by Granlund et al. for a 10% freestream amplitude oscillation and fixed airfoil incidence, comparing a free-surface water tunnel and a closed-circuit wind tunnel. After buoyancy was subtracted from the wind-tunnel data (resulting from the louver pressure drop) and the model inertia subtracted from the water-tunnel data (resulting from acceleration of the test article), the remaining lift and drag histories matched well at the low freestream oscillation amplitude regime. The work of Granlund et al. was later extended to high-advance-ratio streamwise oscillations of 50% amplitude by Greenblatt et al., where the aerodynamic histories of the water-tunnel and wind-tunnel facilities were compared in combined pitch and freestreamoscillations (governed by relative pitch phase), pure pitch oscillations, and purely freestream oscillations. Agreement between the two facilities’ data for fixed-incidence streamwise oscillations was reasonably good, and in fact, better than agreement in just the static lift and drag, evidently owing to differences in blockage and model-support systems. Additionally, Greenblatt et al. determined there was no strong coupling between simultaneous freestream oscillations and pitch oscillations on resultant lift and moment coefficients. KW - Wind energy KW - Dynamic stall KW - Deep stall KW - Airfoil surging KW - Airfoil pitching PY - 2018 U6 - https://doi.org/10.2514/1.J056408 SN - 0001-1452 SN - 1533-385X VL - 56 IS - 4 SP - 1703 EP - 1709 PB - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics AN - OPUS4-43994 LA - eng AD - Bundesanstalt fuer Materialforschung und -pruefung (BAM), Berlin, Germany ER -