0
Research Papers

Modeling of Turbulent Atmospheric Flow Around Tubular and Lattice Meteorological Masts

[+] Author and Article Information
Matthieu Tusch, Christian Masson

Canada Research Chair in Nordic Environment Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines, Ecole de Technologie Supérieure, 1100 rue Notre-Dame Ouest, Montréal, QC, H3C1K3, Canadamatthieu.tusch@gmail.com

Pierre Héraud

 Helimax Energy Inc., 4101 rue Molson, Bureau 100, Montréal, QC, H1Y3L1, Canadaheraudp@helimax.com

J. Sol. Energy Eng 133(1), 011011 (Feb 03, 2011) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4003293 History: Received April 20, 2010; Revised December 12, 2010; Published February 03, 2011; Online February 03, 2011

This paper presents a numerical study of turbulent atmospheric flow around tubular and lattice meteorological masts and a wind speed and energy uncertainty calculation method based on the numerical results. The flow is described by the Reynolds averaged Navier–Stokes equations, complemented by the shear stress transport turbulence model, with modified constants and source terms added to maintain turbulence properties. ANSYS-CFX 11.0 is used to solve the computational model. The numerical results have been post-processed to account for the wind direction changes during the 10-min-measurement-period, and have been validated with mast data. From the numerical results, a wind speed and energy uncertainty calculation method that takes the wind rose into account is proposed. This technique provides a means to detect incorrectly mounted booms according to the local wind conditions. Most importantly, it produces uncertainty more conservatively than both the International Energy Agency (IEA) recommendations and the IEC-61400-121 (International Electrotechnical Commission) annex G norm. These differences stem from the use of a turbulence model in this paper, which predicts higher flow distortions due to the presence of the mast.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2011 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Refinement study, tubular tower. u/u∞ at r/D=3. Re=6E4. IT=12.5%.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Influence of the gamma-theta transition model. u/u∞ at r/D=6.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Comparison of predicted and observed velocity ratio. Re=6E4. TI=12.5%.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Comparison of numerical results using the IEC-61400-121 annex G and the proposed model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Tubular tower, comparison between numerical results from an actuator disk modeling and experimental data. CD=1.18. r/D=10.3.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Comparison of numerical results and experimental data (Helimax Energy, solidity=0.1). r/L=6.5. CD=0.55.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparison of the numerical results using the IEC-61400-121 annex G and the proposed model. Solidity=0.1.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Tubular tower results

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Lattice mast results

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Considered wind rose

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