Analysis of Dynamic Characteristics of an Ultra-Large Semi-Submersible Floating Wind Turbine
<p>A single mooring line with undercover length in a local coordinate system.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Mooring line discretization and indexing.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Side (<b>a</b>) and top (<b>b</b>) views of the braceless semi-submersible platform [<a href="#B23-jmse-07-00169" class="html-bibr">23</a>].</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Arrangement of the mooring system.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Layout of the FOWT.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Overview of FAST used in the fully coupled analysis.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Panel mesh model of the braceless semi-submersible platform.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Time histories of surge decay test.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Power spectra and time histories of the platform motions for different load cases. (<b>a</b>) Time histories of surge motion; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of surge motion; (<b>c</b>) time histories of heave motion; (<b>d</b>) power spectra of heave motion; (<b>e</b>) time histories of pitch motion; (<b>f</b>) power spectra of pitch motion.</p> "> Figure 9 Cont.
<p>Power spectra and time histories of the platform motions for different load cases. (<b>a</b>) Time histories of surge motion; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of surge motion; (<b>c</b>) time histories of heave motion; (<b>d</b>) power spectra of heave motion; (<b>e</b>) time histories of pitch motion; (<b>f</b>) power spectra of pitch motion.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Comparison of power spectra of motion responses for the rated and over-rated wind speeds. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of surge motion; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of heave motion; (<b>c</b>) power spectra of pitch motion.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Comparison of time histories and power spectra of surge motion for the steady and turbulent wind cases. (<b>a</b>) Time histories of surge motion; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of surge motion; (<b>c</b>) time histories of surge motion; (<b>d</b>) power spectra of surge motion.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>Time histories and power spectra of mooring line tension response in the rated wind speed (LC3) case. (<b>a</b>) Time histories of mooring line tension; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of mooring line tension.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>Comparison of motion responses based on the dynamic and quasi-static models. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of surge motion; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of heave motion; (<b>c</b>) power spectra of pitch motion.</p> "> Figure 13 Cont.
<p>Comparison of motion responses based on the dynamic and quasi-static models. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of surge motion; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of heave motion; (<b>c</b>) power spectra of pitch motion.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>Comparison of power spectra of platform motion responses. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of surge motion for the LC3 case; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of pitch motion for the LC3 case; (<b>c</b>) power spectra of surge motion for the over-rated wind speed (LC6) case; (<b>d</b>) power spectra of pitch motion for the LC6 case.</p> "> Figure 14 Cont.
<p>Comparison of power spectra of platform motion responses. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of surge motion for the LC3 case; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of pitch motion for the LC3 case; (<b>c</b>) power spectra of surge motion for the over-rated wind speed (LC6) case; (<b>d</b>) power spectra of pitch motion for the LC6 case.</p> "> Figure 15
<p>Structural loads diagram of the FOWT system.</p> "> Figure 16
<p>Comparison of the power spectra of RootMyc1 response. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of RootMyc1 response for the LC3 case; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of RootMyc1 response for the LC6 case.</p> "> Figure 17
<p>Comparison of the power spectra of TwrBsMyt response. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of TwrBsMyt response for the LC3 case; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of TwrBsMyt response for the LC6 case.</p> "> Figure 17 Cont.
<p>Comparison of the power spectra of TwrBsMyt response. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of TwrBsMyt response for the LC3 case; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of TwrBsMyt response for the LC6 case.</p> "> Figure 18
<p>Comparison of the power spectra of Mooring line 1 (ML1) tension response. (<b>a</b>) Power spectra of ML1 tension response for the LC3 case; (<b>b</b>) power spectra of ML1 tension response for the LC6 case.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Coupled Motion Equation of the FOWT
2.2. Hydrodynamic Loads
2.3. Aerodynamic Loads
2.4. Mooring Line Tension
3. Baseline Model Description and Numerical Tool
3.1. Design of the FOWT
3.2. Introduction of Numerical Tool
4. Simulation Results and Discussion
4.1. Free Decay Test
4.2. Dynamic Response of the FOWT
4.2.1. Environmental Conditions
4.2.2. Statistics of Motion Simulation Results for the 10 MW FOWT
4.2.3. Comparative Analysis of the Motion Responses for the 10 MW FOWT
Analysis of Wind and Wave Load Effects of the 10 MW FOWT
Comparison of Motion Responses of 10 MW FOWT for the Rated and Over-Rated Wind Speeds
Comparison of Motion Responses of the 10 MW FOWT for the Steady and Turbulent Wind
4.3. Dynamic Analysis of Mooring Lines for the 10 MW FOWT
4.3.1. Dynamic Analysis of Mooring Lines Based on the Dynamic Analysis Modeling
4.3.2. Analysis of Dynamic Effects of Mooring Lines Based on Quasi-Static and Dynamic Models
5. Comparison and Analysis of the Dynamic Characteristics of the 10 MW and 5 MW FOWT
5.1. Comparison of Natural Frequencies for the 5 and 10 MW FOWT
5.2. Comparison of Motion Responses for the 5 and 10 MW FOWT
5.3. Comparison of Structural Dynamics for the 5 and 10 MW FOWT
6. Conclusions
- (1)
- The aerodynamic and wave loads induced motion responses differently and independently. Specifically, in the case of turbulent wind, the low-frequency excitation of the wind loads on the system motions should be more prominent so that the fluctuating components of the system motions increase significantly. Additionally, the surge and pitch resonant responses are significantly increased owing to the negative damping from the blade-pitch controller in the over-rated wind case.
- (2)
- The dynamic effects of the mooring line significantly reduced the low-frequency resonant responses of the system motions but had minor effects on the mean values of the integrated motion responses and the mooring tension responses. Accordingly, the integrated motion responses and the mooring tension responses yielded large standard deviations owing to the dynamic amplification effects. This could provide a valuable reference for the safety evaluation and the mooring line design of the ultra-large FOWT.
- (3)
- With the increase in the turbine size, the integrated motion responses and structural dynamics were significantly increased, but the integrated motion responses were in a reasonable range. This showed the initial design of the support platform for the DTU 10 MW wind turbine by upscaling of the existing 5 MW platform design is feasible. Correspondingly, the dynamic behaviors between the motion responses and structural dynamics of the 5 and 10 MW FOWTs were significantly different. It can be seen that the low-frequency excitations of the wind loads on the surge and pitch motions, the tower-base fore-aft bending moments and the mooring line tension responses of the 10 MW FOWT were more prominent than those of the 5 MW FOWT, but the 3P effect on the structural dynamics of the 5 MW FOWT was significant.
Author Contributions
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Liu, J.; Thomas, E.; Manuel, L.; Griffith, D.; Ruehl, K.; Barone, M. Integrated system design for a large wind turbine supported on a moored semi-submersible platform. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2018, 6, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, C.X. Latest Developments in the World’s Wind Power Industry. Sino-Glob. Energy 2012, 17, 32–39. [Google Scholar]
- Han, Y.; Le, C.; Ding, H.; Cheng, Z.; Zhang, P. Stability and dynamic response analysis of a submerged tension leg platform for offshore wind turbines. Ocean Eng. 2017, 129, 68–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Snyder, B.; Kaiser, M.J. Ecological and economic cost-benefit analysis of offshore wind energy. Renew. Energy 2009, 34, 1567–1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeon, S.H.; Cho, Y.U.; Seo, M.W.; Cho, J.R.; Jeong, W.B. Dynamic response of floating substructure of spar-type offshore wind turbine with catenary mooring cables. Ocean Eng. 2013, 72, 356–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roddier, D.; Cermelli, C.; Aubault, A.; Weinstein, A. WindFloat: A floating foundation for offshore wind turbines. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2010, 2, 033104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Philippe, M.; Babarit, A.; Ferrant, P. Modes of response of an offshore wind turbine with directional wind and waves. Renew. Energy 2013, 49, 151–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bachynski, E.E.; Moan, T. Design considerations for tension leg platform wind turbines. Mar. Struct. 2012, 29, 89–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Butterfield, S.; Musial, W.; Jonkman, J.M.; Sclavounos, P. Engineering Challenges for Floating Offshore Wind Turbines; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): Golden, CO, USA, 2007.
- Jonkman, J.M.; Matha, D. Dynamics of offshore floating wind turbines—analysis of three concepts. Wind Energy 2011, 14, 557–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matha, D. Model Development and Loads Analysis of an Offshore Wind Turbine on a Tension Leg Platform with a Comparison to Other Floating Turbine Concepts: April 2009; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): Golden, CO, USA, 2010.
- Li, L.; Hu, Z.; Wang, J. Dynamic responses of a semi-type offshore floating wind turbine. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, San Francisco, CA, USA, 8–13 June 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, Y. Research on Dynamic Analysis for a Spar Type Offshore Floating Wind Turbine. Master’s Thesis, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Karimirad, M. Modeling aspects of a floating wind turbine for coupled wave–wind-induced dynamic analyses. Renew. Energy 2013, 53, 299–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, X.; Huang, D.; Wu, G. The current state of offshore wind energy technology development. Energy 2012, 41, 298–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrison, R.; Hau, E.; Snel, H. Large Wind Turbines: Design and Economic; Wiley: Chichester, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Bak, C.; Bitsche, R.; Yde, A. Light Rotor: The 10-MW reference wind turbine. In Proceedings of the EWEA 2012-European Wind Energy Conference & Exhibition, Copenhagen, Denmark, 16–19 April 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Xue, W.F. Design, Numerical Modelling and Analysis of a Spar Floater Supporting the DTU 10 MW Wind Turbine. Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Tian, X.S. Design, Numerical Modelling and Analysis of a TLP Floater Supporting the DTU 10 MW Wind Turbine. Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Islam, M.T. Design, Numerical Modelling and Analysis of a Semi-Submersible Floater Supporting the DTU 10 MW Wind Turbine. Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, Y.; Hu, Z.; Liu, G. Kinetic characteristics research of the 10 MW-level offshore floating wind turbine. Ocean Eng. 2018, 36, 44–51. [Google Scholar]
- Luan, C.Y.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T. Design and analysis of a braceless steel 5-mw semi-submersible wind turbine. In Proceedings of the 35th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Busan, Korea, 19–24 June 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Luan, C. Design and Analysis for a Steel Braceless Semi-Submersible Hull for Supporting a 5-MW Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine. Ph.D. Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, Z.; Madsen, H.A.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T. A fully coupled method for numerical modeling and dynamic analysis of floating vertical axis wind turbines. Renew. Energy 2017, 107, 604–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jonkman, J.M. Dynamics Modeling and Loads Analysis of an Offshore Floating Wind Turbine; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): Golden, CO, USA, 2007.
- Jonkman, J.M.; Robertson, A.; Hayman, G.J. HydroDyn User’s Guide and Theory Manual; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2014.
- Faltinsen, O. Sea Loads on Ships and Offshore Structures; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, Y.; Yang, J.; He, Y.; Gu, M. Dynamic response analysis of a multi-column tension-leg-type floating wind turbine under combined wind and wave loading. J. Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ. 2016, 21, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moriarty, P.J.; Hansen, A.C. AeroDyn Theory Manual; National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Golden, CO, USA, 2005.
- Hansen, M.O.L.; Sørensen, J.N.; Voutsinas, S. State of the art in wind turbine aerodynamics and aeroelasticity. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 2006, 42, 285–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jonkman, J.M. Dynamics of offshore floating wind turbines-model development and verification. Wind Energy 2009, 12, 459–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giuseppe, R.T.; Alberto, M.A.; Luigia, R. Dynamic modelling of spar bouy wind turbine. In Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Trondheim, Norway, 25–30 June 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Masciola, M.; Robertson, A.; Jonkman, J.; Coulling, A.; Goupee, A. Assessment of the importance of mooring dynamics on the global response of the DeepCwind floating semisubmersible offshore wind turbine. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Anchorage, AK, USA, 30 June–5 July 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Hall, M.; Goupee, A. Validation of a lumped-mass mooring line model with DeepCwind semisubmersible model test data. Ocean Eng. 2015, 104, 590–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vittori, F.E. Design and Analysis of Semi-Submersible Floating Wind Turbines with Focus on Structural Response Reduction. Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Leimeister, M. Rational Upscaling and Modelling of a Semi-Submersible Floating Offshore Wind Turbine. Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Lemmer, F.; Raach, S.; Schlipf, D. Prospects of Linear Model Predictive Control on a 10 MW Floating Wind Turbine. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Houston, TX, USA, 13–19 November 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Masciola, M.; Jonkman, J.; Robertson, A. Implementation of a multisegmented, quasi-static cable model. In Proceedings of the 23th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Anchorage, AK, USA, 30 June–5 July 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Hall, M. MoorDyn—Users Guide; Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Maine: Orono, ME, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- ANSYS A.W., Inc. AQWA Manual Release 15.0; ANSYS A.W., Inc.: Canonsburg, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- M. WAMIT Inc. WAMIT v7.0 Manual; M. WAMIT Inc.: Chestnut Hill, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Jonkman, B.J. TurbSim User’s Guide: Version 1.50; National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL): Golden, CO, USA, 2009.
- Wei, T. The Study of Offshore Floating Wind Turbine on a Tension Leg Platform. Master’s Thesis, Jiangsu University of Science and Technology, Jiangsu, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Jonkman, J.M. Influence of control on the pitch damping of a floating wind turbine. In Proceedings of the 46th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, NV, USA, 7–10 January 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Nielsen, F.G.; Hanson, T.D.; Skaare, B. Integrated dynamic analysis of floating offshore wind turbines. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Hamburg, Germany, 4–9 June 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Karimirad, M.; Michailides, C. V-shaped semisubmersible offshore wind turbine: An alternative concept for offshore wind technology. Renew. Energy 2015, 83, 126–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Turbine Type | DTU 10 MW | NREL 5 MW |
---|---|---|
Wind regime | IEC Class 1A | IEC Class 1B |
Rotor orientation, configuration | Clockwise, upwind, three blades | Clockwise, upwind, three blades |
Control | Variable speed, collective pitch | Variable speed, collective pitch |
Cut-in, rated, cut-out wind speed (m/s) | 4.0, 11.4, 25 | 3.0, 11.4, 25 |
Rated thrust (kN) | 1500 | 750 |
Rotor, hub diameter (m) | 178.3, 5.6 | 126, 3 |
Hub height (m) | 119 | 90 |
Drive train | Medium speed, multiple-stage gearbox | High speed, multiple-stage gearbox |
Rated generator speed (rpm) | 480.0 | 1173.7 |
Gearbox ratio | 50:1 | 97:1 |
Rated tip speed (m/s) | 90 | 80 |
Hub overhang(m), shaft tilt (°), precone (°) | 7.07, 5, −2.5 | 5.0, 5, −2.5 |
Blade prebend (m) | 3.332 | 0.000 |
Rotor mass, nacelle mass(t) | 229.0, 446.0 | 110, 240.0 |
Turbine Type | DTU 10 MW | NREL 5 MW |
---|---|---|
Elevation of tower top above SWL (m) | 115.63 | 87.6 |
Elevation of tower base above SWL (m) | 12.30 | 10 |
Overall tower length (m) | 103.33 | 77.6 |
Tower top diameter and thickness (m) | 5.50, 0.02 | 3.87, 0.019 |
Tower base diameter and thickness (m) | 8.00, 0.036 | 6.5, 0.027 |
Tower steel density (kg·m−3) | 8500 | 8500 |
Overall (integrated) tower mass (t) | 527.362 | 249.65 |
Center of gravity above SWL on tower centerline (m) | 56.00 | 43.35 |
Turbine Type | DTU 10 MW | NREL 5 MW |
---|---|---|
dc (m) | 8 | 6.5 |
ds (m) | 8 | 6.5 |
hcu (m) | 12.30 | 10 |
hsu(m) | 24.60 | 20 |
hb (m) | 29.52 | 24 |
dpw (m) | 11.07 | 9 |
dph (m) | 7.38 | 6 |
dcs (m) | 50.43 | 41 |
dcse (m) | 55.965 | 45.5 |
Depth of water (m) | 100 | 100 |
COG of the platform during operation phase (m) | (0, 0, −30.092) | (0, 0, −24.36) |
Displacement (m3) | 19257.13 | 10555 |
Platform steel density (kg·m−3) | 7850 | 7850 |
Platform mass, including ballast water (t) | 17942.21 | 9789 |
Platform steel mass (t) | 3259 | 1804 |
COG of the platform steel mass | (0, 0, −19.089) | (0, 0, −12.31) |
Number of the Mooring Line | 3 |
---|---|
Mooring line type | Spiral rope |
Transversal drag coefficient | 1.2 |
Longitudinal drag coefficient | 0.02 |
Transversal added-mass coefficient | 0 |
Longitudinal added-mass coefficient | 1 |
Length of each line (m) | 666.5 |
Mass of per length (kg·m−1) | 466 |
Diameter of the mooring line (m) | 0.153 |
Equivalent axial stiffness (N) | 2.5 × 109 |
Fairlead distance from platform center (m) | 54.3 |
Turbine Type | DTU 10 MW | NREL 5 MW |
---|---|---|
Surge/Sway (Hz) | 0.013 | 0.015 |
Heave (Hz) | 0.036 | 0.039 |
Roll/Pitch (Hz) | 0.039 | 0.042 |
Yaw (Hz) | 0.012 | 0.012 |
1st tower side-side (Hz) | 0.368 | 0.436 |
1st tower fore-aft (Hz) | 0.379 | 0.442 |
Minimum rotor speed (rpm) | 6.0 | 6.9 |
Maximum rotor speed (rpm) | 9.6 | 12.1 |
Load Cases (LCs) | Hs (m) | Tp (s) | Turbulence Intensity | Turbine Status | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
LC1 | 11.4 | - | - | - | operating |
LC2 | - | 2.5 | 10.2 | - | operating |
LC3 | 11.4 | 2.5 | 10.2 | - | operating |
LC4 | 11.4 | 2.5 | 10.2 | 0.15 | operating |
LC5 | 18 | 2.5 | 10.2 | - | operating |
LC6 | 18 | 4.1 | 10.5 | - | operating |
LC7 | 18 | 4.1 | 10.5 | 0.13 | operating |
Mode | Statistic | LC1 | LC2 | LC3 | LC4 | LC5 | LC6 | LC7 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Surge (m) | Maximum | 7.77 | 0.45 | 8.19 | 10.77 | 3.97 | 4.35 | 5.43 |
Minimum | 7.72 | −0.43 | 7.31 | 1.45 | 3.12 | 2.72 | 1.93 | |
Mean | 7.75 | −0.01 | 7.76 | 6.09 | 3.53 | 3.53 | 3.52 | |
STD | 0.01 | 0.15 | 0.15 | 1.87 | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.64 | |
Heave (m) | Maximum | 1.14 | 1.61 | 1.43 | 1.52 | 1.55 | 1.84 | 1.91 |
Minimum | 1.06 | 0.95 | 0.77 | 0.82 | 0.92 | 0.63 | 0.60 | |
Mean | 1.10 | 1.28 | 1.10 | 1.15 | 1.23 | 1.23 | 1.23 | |
STD | 0.03 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.12 | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.21 | |
Pitch (°) | Maximum | 4.20 | 0.07 | 4.40 | 5.47 | 2.14 | 2.30 | 4.74 |
Minimum | 4.20 | −0.36 | 3.99 | 1.01 | 1.74 | 1.63 | −0.56 | |
Mean | 4.20 | −0.14 | 4.20 | 3.38 | 1.94 | 1.94 | 2.04 | |
STD | 0.00 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.81 | 0.08 | 0.13 | 0.93 |
Surge (m) | Heave (m) | Pitch (°) | Mooring Line Tension (kN) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | STD | Mean | STD | Mean | STD | Mean | STD | |
Quasi-static | 7.67 | 0.14 | 1.06 | 0.10 | 4.20 | 0.08 | 1025.58 | 2.52 |
Dynamic | 7.76 | 0.15 | 1.10 | 0.11 | 4.20 | 0.08 | 1021.15 | 5.16 |
Mode | Load Case | Maximum | Minimum | Mean | STD |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Surge (m) | LC3 | 6.65 | 5.40 | 6.01 | 0.21 |
LC6 | 4.06 | 1.86 | 2.96 | 0.36 | |
Heave (m) | LC3 | 0.78 | 0.00 | 0.34 | 0.15 |
LC6 | 1.27 | −0.40 | 0.45 | 0.27 | |
Pitch (°) | LC3 | 3.24 | 2.69 | 2.97 | 0.09 |
LC6 | 1.54 | 0.54 | 1.04 | 0.17 |
Issue | Load Case | Turbine | Maximum | Minimum | Mean | STD |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RootMyc1 (kN·m) | LC3 | 5 MW | 11,030.00 | 8957.00 | 10,120.37 | 569.76 |
10 MW | 31,700.00 | 26,910.00 | 29,577.44 | 1113.86 | ||
LC6 | 5 MW | 6459.00 | 2655.00 | 4643.67 | 973.99 | |
10 MW | 15,980.00 | 9524.00 | 12,847.27 | 1935.73 | ||
Thrust (kN) | LC3 | 5 MW | 908.00 | 826.50 | 868.47 | 13.04 |
10 MW | 1984.00 | 1776.00 | 1878.32 | 33.15 | ||
LC6 | 5 MW | 548.50 | 378.40 | 467.93 | 26.70 | |
10 MW | 1211.00 | 785.90 | 997.13 | 71.49 | ||
TwrBsFxt (kN) | LC3 | 5 MW | 1175.00 | 827.00 | 1009.70 | 54.94 |
10 MW | 2715.00 | 1990.00 | 2348.44 | 120.63 | ||
LC6 | 5 MW | 724.40 | 163.60 | 454.64 | 92.06 | |
10 MW | 1731.00 | 518.70 | 1111.01 | 199.66 | ||
TwrBsMyt (kN·m) | LC3 | 5 MW | 87,030.00 | 63,910.00 | 76,202.47 | 3709.71 |
10 MW | 259,600.00 | 191,000.00 | 224,712.38 | 11,288.86 | ||
LC6 | 5 MW | 55,010.00 | 15,760.00 | 35,860.25 | 6316.27 | |
10 MW | 163,800.00 | 49,500.00 | 103,991.09 | 19,004.32 | ||
ML1 tension (kN) | LC3 | 5 MW | 418.20 | 378.60 | 396.81 | 3.28 |
10 MW | 1042.00 | 1003.00 | 1021.15 | 5.16 | ||
LC6 | 5 MW | 582.70 | 388.00 | 492.56 | 6.61 | |
10 MW | 1431.00 | 1312.00 | 1368.16 | 9.17 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhao, Z.; Li, X.; Wang, W.; Shi, W. Analysis of Dynamic Characteristics of an Ultra-Large Semi-Submersible Floating Wind Turbine. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7060169
Zhao Z, Li X, Wang W, Shi W. Analysis of Dynamic Characteristics of an Ultra-Large Semi-Submersible Floating Wind Turbine. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering. 2019; 7(6):169. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7060169
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhao, Zhixin, Xin Li, Wenhua Wang, and Wei Shi. 2019. "Analysis of Dynamic Characteristics of an Ultra-Large Semi-Submersible Floating Wind Turbine" Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 7, no. 6: 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7060169