0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Comparing Fatigue Strength From Full Scale Blade Tests With Coupon-Based Predictions

[+] Author and Article Information
Hans van Leeuwen, Don van Delft

Delft University of Technology, WMC-Group, Delft, The Netherlands

John Heijdra, Henk Braam

Netherlands Energy Research Foundation ECN, Wind Energy, Petten, The Netherlands

Eric R. Jørgensen

Wind Energy Department, RISO̸ National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmarke-mail: erik.r.joergensen@risoe.dk

Denja Lekou, Pantelis Vionis

Center for Renewable Energy Sources, CRES, Pikermi Attiki, 19009, Greece

J. Sol. Energy Eng 124(4), 404-411 (Nov 08, 2002) (8 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1509463 History: Received March 01, 2002; Revised July 01, 2002; Online November 08, 2002
Copyright © 2002 by ASME
Topics: Blades
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
FEM model and shape of the blade
Grahic Jump Location
Results from FACT database
Grahic Jump Location
Dimensions (in mm) of PROFAR coupons
Grahic Jump Location
Test results for PORFAR coupons
Grahic Jump Location
R=0.1 coupon date for PROFAR and FACT
Grahic Jump Location
R=−1 coupon data for PROFAR and FACT
Grahic Jump Location
Test set-up at CRES for prismatic tests
Grahic Jump Location
Unprocessed fatigue data for all blade and coupon tests (expressed in strain range)
Grahic Jump Location
Moving path of load application point
Grahic Jump Location
Normalized effective bending moment
Grahic Jump Location
Equivalent Smax after rain flow counting
Grahic Jump Location
Relation between SN curve and the modified Goodman relation
Grahic Jump Location
Corrected results for the tip section tests
Grahic Jump Location
Corrected results for the root section flapwise tests
Grahic Jump Location
Corrected results for root section edgewise tests
Grahic Jump Location
Normalized residuals derived from nonlinear regression analysis of blade test results
Grahic Jump Location
Blade results prismatic section (UTS based on coupon strength), compared with coupon data
Grahic Jump Location
Blade results root section (UTS based on coupon strength), compared with coupon data
Grahic Jump Location
Blade results edgewise root section (UTS based on coupon strength), compared with coupon data
Grahic Jump Location
Blade results for prismatic section (UTS based on static blade strength), compared with coupon data
Grahic Jump Location
Blade results for root section (UTS based on static blade strength), compared with coupon data
Grahic Jump Location
Blade results for edgewise root section (UTS based on static blade strength), compared with coupon data
Grahic Jump Location
Blade failure at L=780 mm from root after fatigue test, focusing on root section (viewed from tensile side)
Grahic Jump Location
Blade failure at L=820 mm from root after static test, focusing on root section (viewed from compressive side)
Grahic Jump Location
Blade failure edgewise fatigue test

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In