Parameterisation of intra array effects around Wind Turbine Monopiles

Maxwell Needham

Abstract


Project II is a continuation of project I which studied the effects of wave incidence angle and current interaction around offshore Wind Turbine Monopiles. This report presents a brief recap of project I findings and objectives before identifying the experimental methodology used for lab testing, post processing and results analysis. Laboratory testing conducted in the Plymouth Coast basin used a 1:50 scale Monopile to replicate the prototype site and conditions of Scroby Sands Offshore Windfarm.  Turbulent Kinetic Energy (TKE) and Bed Shear Stress were measured across the wake region as part of this testing, enabling a number of conclusions to be drawn. Firstly, it was noted when wave and current propagation directions were more aligned a higher level of TKE is noted at both bed and free stream level, this was seen to decay to background levels along the downstream centreline from the Monopile at around 14 diameters at free stream level. At bed level it took 8 Monopile diameters downstream to decay which was different to that predicted in Rogan’s (2015) work. Secondly, the turbulent wake region was seen to have rotated anticlockwise under wave conditions to align more with incident wave direction; this was particularly seen when wave propagation angles aligned with those of the current. Thirdly, Bed Shear Stress was observed along the downstream centreline from the Monopile. Although no clear relationships were observed, it was noted that a slightly higher level of Bed Shear Stress was seen when waves and currents were propagated at perpendicular angles. This testing also confirmed that the observed Bed Shear Stress, when scaled, matched in magnitude that of Scroby Sands prototype site. The need for research in this specific area of current and wave interaction around Monopiles is of high importance in order to bring down development costs of offshore renewables therefore a number of recommendations for further research have been made in this report.


Full Text:

PDF

References


CEFAS (2006) ‘Scroby Sands Offshore Wind Farm – Coastal Processes Monitoring . Final Report for the Department of Trade and Industry Ecosystem Interactions’, (July), pp. 1–51.

Crone, T. (no date) The Basic Sediment Transport Equations Made Ridiculously Simple, 2004. Available at: http://www.ocean.washington.edu/courses/oc410/reading/sedtrans_2004.pdf (Accessed: 4 March 2015).

Dight, M. (2013) ‘Investigation into the change in hydrodynamic conditions and environmental impacts caused by the introduction of a wind turbine monopile to the marine environment’, (September).

European Commission (2014) The 2020 climate and energy package. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/index_en.htm.

Goring, D. G., Nikora, V. I. and Derek G, Goring; Vladimir I, N. (2002) Despiking Acoustic Doppler Velocimeter Data, JOURNAL OF HYDRAULIC ENGINEERING. Available at: http://imos-toolbox.googlecode.com/svn-history/r1283/wiki/documents/QC/CTD/goring_nikora02.pdf (Accessed: 10 November 2015).

Metoc plc (2000) ‘An assessment of the environmental effects of Offshore Wind Farms’, p. 67.

Miles, J. (2003) ‘Matlab Denoising & Wave demodulation Scripts.’

OFELIA (2015) OFELIA. Available at: http://www.interreg-ofelia.eu/ (Accessed: 15 February 2015).

Rogan, C., Miles, J., Simmonds, D. and Iglesias, G. (2015) ‘The Hydrodynamics of Monopile Foundations - Experimental Measurements of Near Bed and Free Stream Turbulence’, pp. 1–8. Available at: http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/abs/10.1201/b18973-115.

Shearer, S. ; H. (no date) ‘Fluid Mechanics: Stokes’ Law and Viscosity.’ Available at: http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic1032465.files/Final Projects/Fluids Drag/stokes lab.pdf (Accessed: 17 March 2015).

Sumer, B.M.; Christiansen, N, Fredsøe, J. (1997) ‘The Horseshoe Vortex and Vortex sheading around a vertical wall mounted cylinder exposed to waves’, Journel of Fluid Mechnanics, 332, pp. 41–70.

Stapelton, K; Huntley, D. (1995) ‘Seabed Stress Determainations using the Inertial Dissipation Dethord and the Turbulent Kenetic Energy Methord’, Earth Surface Processes & Landforms, 20(1), pp. 807–815.

Tumbler (no date) Fluid Turbulence.Jpg. Available at: https://41.media.tumblr.com/4262dc9237542247b4de06073cdb6eb0/tumblr_mvv5uuer1g1qckzoqo1_500.jpg (Accessed: 20 March 2015).

University of Illinois (no date) Calculation of Bed Shear Stress Calculation of Bed Shear Stress, Geology Department. Available at: http://classes.geology.illinois.edu/11SprgClass/geo575/ALBDD Lecture 3 Calculation of Shear Stress.pdf (Accessed: 10 March 2015).

USGS (2008) Simulation of Flow, Sediment Transport, and Sediment Mobility of the Lower Coeur d’Alene River, Idaho, Scientific Investigations Report. Available at: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5093/table7.html (Accessed: 10 March 2015).

Vanhellemont, Q. and Ruddick, K. (2014) ‘Turbid wakes associated with offshore wind turbines observed with Landsat 8’, Remote Sensing of Environment. The Authors, 145, pp. 105–115. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2014.01.009.

Vassalos, D. (1999) ‘Physical modelling and similitude of marine structures’, 26, pp. 111–123. doi: 10.1016/S0029-8018(97)10004-X.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License 
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License

ISSN 1754-2383 [Online] ©University of Plymouth