0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Roughness Sensitivity Considerations for Thick Rotor Blade Airfoils

[+] Author and Article Information
R. P. J. O. M. van Rooij, W. A. Timmer

Delft University Wind Energy Research Institute, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Stevinweg 1, 2628CN, Delft, the Netherlands

J. Sol. Energy Eng 125(4), 468-478 (Nov 26, 2003) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1624614 History: Received January 24, 2003; Revised July 12, 2003; Online November 26, 2003
Copyright © 2003 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Corten, G. P., and Veldkamp, H. F., 2001, “Insects Cause Double Stall,” 2001 European Wind Energy Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 470–474.
Drela, M., 1985, “Two-Dimensional Transonic Aerodynamic Design and Analysis Using Euler Equations,” Doctor Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, MA, USA.
Rooij, R. P. J. O. M. van, 1996, “Modification of the Boundary Layer Calculation in RFOIL for Improved Airfoil Stall Prediction,” Report IW-96087R, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands. http://www.windenergy.citg.tudelft.nl/.
Snel, H., Houwink, R., and Bosschers, J., 1993, “Sectional Prediction of Lift Coefficients on Rotating Wind Turbine Blades in Stall,” Report ECN-93-052, Energy Research Center of the Netherlands, Petten, the Netherlands.
Snel, H., Houwink, R., Bosschers, J., Piers, W. J., van Bussel, G. J. W., and Bruining, A., 1993, “Sectional Prediction of 3-D Effects for Stalled Flow on Rotating Blades and Comparison With Measurements,” Proceedings European Community Wind Energy Conference, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, pp. 395–399.
Berg, B. van den, 1976, “Investigations of Three-Dimensional Incompressible Turbulent Boundary Layers,” Doctor thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, also in Report NLR TR 76001 U, National Aerospace Laboratory NLR, the Netherlands.
Bosschers, J., Montgomery, B., Brand, A., and van Rooij, R., 1996, “Influence of Blade Rotation on the Sectional Aerodynamics of Rotational Blades,” 22nd European Rotorcraft Forum 1996, Bristol, England.
Brand, A. J., van Garrel, A., Snel, H., Rozendal, Houwink, D. R., van Rooij, R. P. J. O. M., and Timmer, W. A., 2000, “Voorstudie Radiale Stroming in Overtrek” (Preparatory study on the effects of radial flow in stall), Report ECN-C-00-002 (in Dutch), Energy Research Center of the Netherlands, Petten, the Netherlands.
Rooij, R. P. J. O. M. van, 2001, “Experiments on Wind Turbine Airfoils and Wind Turbine Rotors,” International Wind Tunnel Symposium—Memorial Ceremony of Mie University Satellite Venture Business Laboratory, Tsu, Japan.
Rönsten,  R., 1992, “Static Pressure Measurements on a Rotating and a Nonrotating 2.375 m Wind Turbine Blade. Comparison With 2-D Calculations,” J. Wind. Eng. Ind. Aerodyn., 39, pp. 105–118, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Timmer, W. A., van Rooij, R. P. J. O. M., and Bruining, A., 1999, “Measured Section Performance of Rotating Blades as Input to the Design of Inboard Airfoils,” Proceedings European Wind Energy Conference, Nice, France, pp. 679–682.
Althaus, D., 1997, “Airfoils and Experimental Results From the Laminar Wind Tunnel of the Institut für Aerodynamik und Gasdynamik der Universität Stuttgart,” ISBN 3-528-03820-9, Stuttgart, Germany.
Fuglsang, P., Antoniou, I., Dahl, K., and Madsen, H., 1998, “Wind Tunnel Tests of the FFA-W3-241, FFA-W3-301 and NACA 63-430 Airfoils,” Risø-R-1041(EN), Roskilde, Denmark.
Björck, A., 1993, “2-D Airfoil Wind Tunnel Test at Stall,” Presented at the IEA 7th Symposium on Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines, TU-Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Braslow, A. L., and Knox, E. C., 1958, “Simplified Method for Determination of Critical Height of Distributed Roughness Particles for Boundary-Layer Transition at Mach Numbers From 0 to 5,” NACA technical note 4363, USA.
Timmer, W. A., and van Rooij, R. P. J. O. M., 1993, “Wind Tunnel Results for a 25% Thick Wind Turbine Blade Airfoil,” Proceedings European Community Wind Energy Conference, Lübeck-Travemünde, Germany, pp. 416–419.
Somers, D. M., and Tangler, J. L., 1995, “Wind-Tunnel Test of the S814 Thick Root Airfoil,” Proceedings of ASME 1995, and SED-Vol. 16, Wind Energy—1995, Reno, NV, USA.
Timmer, W. A., 1990, “WECS Blade Airfoils—The NACA 63-4XX Series,” Proceedings European Community Wind Energy Conference, Madrid, Spain, pp. 243–246.
Timmer, W. A., 1993, “The Design and Testing of Airfoil DU 91-W2-250,”Proceedings of the 6th IEA Symposium on the Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines, ETSU-N-125, Future Energy Solutions, Oxfordshire, England.
Fuglsang, P., and Bak, C., 1999, “Wind Tunnel Tests of the Risø-A1-18, Risø-A1-21 and Risø-A1-24 Airfoils,” Report Risø-R-1112(EN), Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark.
Timmer, W. A., and van Rooij, R. P. J. O. M., 1998, “Ontwerp en Windtunneltest van Profiel DU 97-W-300” (Design and Wind Tunnel Measurements of the DU 97-W-300 Airfoil), Report IW-98003R (In Dutch), Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
Timmer, W. A., and van Rooij, R. P. J. O. M., 2003, “Summary of the Delft University Wind Turbine Dedicated Airfoils,” 41st Aerospace Sciences Meeting, Paper no. AIAA-2003-0352, Reno, NV, USA, pp. 22–31.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Pressure distributions measured and calculated for the rotating situation (Re=1.0×106)
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison in the rotating configuration of measurements with calculations at r/R=0.55 segment 8
Grahic Jump Location
Pressure distributions of two selected data points from experiment and calculations at the r/R=0.55 segment 8
Grahic Jump Location
The shape of three approximately 25% thick airfoils
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison in the clean configuration for DU 91-W2-250 measured by Delft
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison for FFA-W3-241 measured by Risø 13
Grahic Jump Location
Comparison for FFA-W3-211 measured by FFA 14
Grahic Jump Location
The shape of the ZZ-tape applied at the Delft measurements (thickness=0.35 mm)
Grahic Jump Location
Performance for 25% thick airfoils in the clean configuration (S814 is 24% thick)
Grahic Jump Location
The airfoil shapes of two 24% thick airfoils
Grahic Jump Location
Performance for two 24% thick airfoils (clean configuration, VELUX tunnel)
Grahic Jump Location
Airfoil performance for three “25%” thick airfoils with simulated roughness
Grahic Jump Location
Measured data for two 24% thick airfoils with transition fixed at upper (x/c=0.05) and lower surface (x/c=0.1)
Grahic Jump Location
The airfoil shapes of three 30% thick airfoils
Grahic Jump Location
(a) Characteristics for three 30% thick airfoils in the clean configuration (FFA data is at Re=1.6e×106). (b) The lift-to-drag ratio and the lift for three 30% thick airfoils in the clean configuration (FFA data is at Re=1.6e×106).
Grahic Jump Location
Characteristics for 30% thick airfoils in the “rough” configuration (DU at Re=2.0×106, FFA at Re=1.6×106 and AH at Re=1.5×106)
Grahic Jump Location
The lift performance two for 30% thick airfoils in the “rough” configuration (AH at Re=1.5×106, NACA at Re=1.6×106)
Grahic Jump Location
The effect of additional transition (at x/c=0.2) on the lower surface of the DU 97-W-300 airfoil
Grahic Jump Location
Measured and calculated lift performance for DU 00-W-350 and DU 00-W-401 at Re=3.0×106 (clean and transition fixed condition, solid line=calculations)
Grahic Jump Location
A sketch of the vortex generators applied at the wind tunnel tests. Dimensions are in mm
Grahic Jump Location
The effect of vortex generators (x/c=0.2) on the performance of the DU 97-W-300 airfoil
Grahic Jump Location
The effect of vortex generators (x/c=0.2) on the performance of the Risø-A1-24 airfoil
Grahic Jump Location
The effect of ZZ-tape (x/c=0.05) on the performance with vortex generators at x/c=0.2
Grahic Jump Location
The effect of ZZ-tape on the airfoil performance with vortex generators
Grahic Jump Location
The influence of the spanwise position for the clean configuration (Re=3.0×106, solid lines=calculations)
Grahic Jump Location
The influence of rotation for the configuration with fixed transition at Re=3.0×106 (solid lines=calculations)
Grahic Jump Location
Calculated difference in 3-D lift between clean and fixed-transition for 2 airfoils at the inboard blade position for Re=3.0×106
Grahic Jump Location
Wind tunnel and rotating experiment compared with calculated performance (solid line) both at the 30% section

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