Enme 547 Group 4 Finalreport
Enme 547 Group 4 Finalreport
Enme 547 Group 4 Finalreport
PROBLEM DEFINITION
This paper examines a Computational Fluid Dynamic
(CFD) analysis on an S809 wind turbine blade illustrated
in figure 1. The goal of the CFD analysis was to compare
the aerodynamic forces and moments present on the S809
airfoil when placed in an oncoming air flow. In the
analysis the velocity of the oncoming wind was kept
constant while the angle of attack of the airfoil varied. The
changes in the coefficients of lift, drag, and moment were
obtained from the ANSYS FLUENT solver. The analysis
also examined the results in accordance with three
different viscosity models for comparison reasons.
Operating Assumptions
The analysis is done in steady state. The working
fluid is air, chosen at International Standard Metric
Conditions (15 C and 101.325 kPa). Based on the
viscosity and density of air in these conditions, a chord
length of 0.60m and a Reynolds number of 2106, the free
stream velocity was determined to be 49 m/s. The
roughness constant of the airfoil was not given in the
Wolfe and Ochs analysis. Wind turbine blade roughness
depend on manufacturing techniques, and vary through
contaminating agents such as dust, dirt, ice and insects
(Sagol et. al., 2013). Providing a definite roughness factor
is therefore not a meaningful property. In this analysis the
default roughness constant of 0.5 was utilized.
Meshing Technique
To model the flow around the airfoil, an external shell
was made around the airfoil to represent the far field
boundary. To accurately represent this boundary where
the effect of the airfoil was negligible, the outline of the
shell had to be extended to 20 times the chord length
behind the airfoil and 10 times the chord length above,
MODELING METHODOLOGY
The following underlines the modelling assumptions,
meshing techniques, discretization methods and solver
Discretization methods
The solution was obtained through implicit
formulation, which is more stable than explicit
formulation and allows for shorter convergence times
(ANSYS,2014). The Least Square Cell Based gradient
method was used as the least computationally expensive
option with reasonably accurate results. For pressure,
momentum, energy, and dissipation rate, the second order
upwind discretization was used. This is because the first
order discretization methods are insufficient to accurately
predict drag (ANSYS, 2014).
Solver Algorithms
The CFD analysis was carried using typical 2
equation viscosity turbulent models. The k- turbulent
model provided a point of best reference to the Wolfe and
Ochs results. This was the least computationally
expensive option, known to produce reasonably good
results for unseparated flows with relatively small
pressure gradients (Bardina et. Al., 1997). To account for
the possibility of flow separation at higher angels of
attack, the analysis was also conducted using the standard
k- model. This model has proven to have better
numerical stability than the k- model, primarily in the
viscous boundary layer near the airfoil wall (Bardina et.
Al., 1997). However, the standard k- model is more
computationally expensive than the k- model. This
analysis will determine if the gain in accuracy is
significant enough to justify using the standard k-
especially when flow separation happens.
MESH CONVERGENCE
To analyse the quality of mesh resolutions, the results
obtained using each mesh resolution was compared
against the experimental results given by Wolfe and Ochs.
This was done for each turbulent model but only at 0
angle of attack. Table 1 illustrates the percent errors
achieved in coefficient of lift (Cl), coefficient of drag (Cd),
and coefficient of moment (Cm), as mesh quality was
k-
SST
Wolfe's
Exp.
Result
Cd
Error
x 104
890
%
Error
60.6%
Result
0.0280
864
58.8%
0.0263
841
57.3%
0.0261
906
61.7%
0.0280
754
51.4%
0.0263
0.2147
678
46.2%
100
0.2114
645
150
0.1824
175
0.1726
Mesh
100
Result
0.2359
150
0.2333
175
0.2310
100
0.2375
150
0.2223
175
0.1469
0.1469
0.1469
Wolfe's
Exp.
Result
Cm
Error x
104
210
%
Error
300%
Result
-0.0702
193
276%
-0.0688
191
273%
-0.0677
210
299%
-0.0705
193
275%
-0.0664
0.0257
187
267%
43.9%
0.0277
207
355
24.2%
0.0259
257
17.5%
0.0254
0.0070
0.0070
0.0070
Wolfe's
Exp.
Result
Error x
104
-259
%
Error
58.6%
-245
55.3%
-234
52.9%
-262
59.0%
-221
49.9%
-0.0645
-202
45.6%
296%
-0.0644
-201
45.3%
189
270%
-0.0566
-123
27.8%
184
262%
-0.0540
-97
21.9%
-0.0443
-0.0443
-0.0443
k-
k-
SST
Cd
Angle
Result
Wolfe's
Exp.
Result
0.2310
0.1469
1.02
0.3301
0.2716
585
21.6%
5.13
0.7119
0.7609
-490
-6.4%
9.22
1.0599
1.0385
214
0.2147
0.1469
678
1.02
0.3131
0.2716
415
5.13
0.6702
0.7609
-907
9.22
1.0244
1.0385
-141
0.1726
0.1469
257
1.02
0.2651
0.2716
-65
5.13
0.6136
0.7609
-1,473
9.22
0.8953
1.0385
-1,432
-13.8%
Cm
Error x
104
%
Error
Result
Wolfe's
Exp.
Result
0.0070
191
273%
-0.0677
-0.0443
-234
52.9%
0.0297
0.0072
225
312%
-0.0698
-0.0491
-207
42.1%
0.0592
0.0070
522
745%
-0.0742
-0.0609
-133
21.9%
2.1%
0.1140
0.0214
926
433%
-0.0748
-0.0495
-253
51.1%
46.2%
0.0257
0.0070
187
267%
-0.0645
-0.0443
-202
45.6%
15.3%
0.0284
0.0072
212
294%
-0.0659
-0.0491
-168
34.2%
-11.9%
0.0562
0.0070
492
703%
-0.0685
-0.0609
-76
12.4%
-1.4%
0.1081
0.0214
867
405%
-0.0697
-0.0495
-202
40.8%
17.5%
0.0254
0.0070
184
262%
-0.0540
-0.0443
-97
21.9%
-2.4%
0.0276
0.0072
204
283%
-0.0548
-0.0491
-57
11.6%
-19.4%
0.0538
0.0070
468
668%
-0.0592
-0.0609
17
-2.9%
0.1046
0.0214
832
389%
-0.0627
-0.0495
-132
26.7%
Error x
104
% Error
Result
841
57.3%
0.0261
Wolfe's
Exp.
Result
Error x
104
% Error
Roughness height of 0
Spatial Discretization:
Gradient of Least Squares Cell Based
Second order in Pressure
Second order upwind in Momentum
Second order upwind in Turbulent kinetic energy
Second order Upwind in Turbulent Dissipation Rate
VALIDATION OF RESULTS
To analyse the quality of mesh resolutions, the results
obtained using each mesh resolution was compared
against the experimental results given by Wolfe and Ochs.
Table 1 illustrates
The default conditions that we used were:
Turbulent Intensity of 5%
Turbulent Viscosity Ratio of 10
Roughness constant of 0.5
SYNOPSIS
The purpose of this document is to propose a topic of
study for the ENME 547 final project presentation. The
topic of study that will be pursued is as follows: the
computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis of moving
air acting upon a stationary wind turbine blade. The
purpose of this study is to analyse the resultant forces
Table 3. Comparison of CFD Results with CFD Analysis by Wolfe and Ochs (1997)
Cl
Turb.
Model
k-
k-
SST
Cd
Cm
angle
Result
Wolfe's
k-
Result
0.2310
0.1324
986
74.5%
0.0261
0.0108
153
142%
-0.0677
-0.04
-277
69.3%
1.02
0.3301
0.2494
807
32.4%
0.0297
0.0110
187
170%
-0.0698
-0.0426
-272
63.8%
5.13
0.7119
0.7123
-4
-0.1%
0.0592
0.0124
468
377%
-0.0742
-0.0513
-229
44.7%
0.2147
0.1324
823
62.2%
0.0257
0.0108
149
138%
-0.0645
-0.04
-245
61.3%
1.02
0.3131
0.2494
637
25.5%
0.0284
0.0110
174
158%
-0.0659
-0.0426
-233
54.7%
5.13
0.6702
0.7123
-421
-5.9%
0.0562
0.0124
438
353%
-0.0685
-0.0513
-172
33.5%
0.1726
0.1324
402
30.4%
0.0254
0.0108
146
135%
-0.0540
-0.04
-140
35.0%
1.02
0.2651
0.2494
157
6.3%
0.0276
0.0110
166
151%
-0.0548
-0.0426
-122
28.7%
5.13
0.6136
0.7123
-987
-13.9%
0.0538
0.0124
414
334%
-0.0592
-0.0513
-79
15.3%
Error x
104
% Error
Result
Wolfe's
k-
Result
Error x
104
% Error
Result
Wolfe's
k-
Result
Error
x 104
% Error
TOPIC OF STUDY
The topic of study will be restated in this section so
that it is explicitly clear to the reader. At this point is it
unclear how the velocity of the air or the angle of attack
affects the resultant forces that act on the specific turbine
blade geometry shown in figure 1. CFD analysis will be
used to model the flow of moving air passing a stationary
turbine blade with geometry shown in figure 1, to
determine the resultant forces that act upon the turbine
blade. This topic of study is relevant to the course material
because it involves using numerical methods to solve fluid
dynamics.
APPLICATION OF RESULTS
Using the results from a 2 Dimensional airfoil analysis
to design a 3 Dimensional wind turbine blade has been
commonly practiced traditionally. To this day, this method
is the chosen industry approach in designing wind turbine
blades in accordance with blade element theory (Liu &
Janajreh, 2012). Blade element theory divides a 3
dimensional blade in ten to twenty sections along the
length of the blade. Each section is then averaged to its 2
dimensional airfoil. The Cl, Cd, and Cm data at various
Reynold number and various angles of attack for a chosen
airfoil is then used to decide the desired twist angle for
each of the blade sections (Emrah, 2011). A 3 dimensional
blade can therefore be designed from the results of the
current analysis, if it is extended to include more
Reynolds numbers.
METHODOLOGY
Due the complexity of modelling all blades of a wind
turbine, this analysis will focus on a single stationary
blade. The blade will be stationary in order to analyse the
moving air in the blades relative frame of reference as
opposed to the absolute frame of reference. The program
ANASYS will be used to model the geometry of the
turbine blade. In particular, the blade profile to be
analysed is S809, which is a standard profile used in
existing wind turbines (Wolfe & Ochs, 1997). Figure 1
shows the cross sectional geometry of a S809 turbine
blade profile.
turbine blade has a longer length than the other side. This
causes air to flow faster over the longer side, due to the
continuity of the airstream. According to the conservation
of energy principle, an increase in the fluids velocity will
result in lowering the fluids pressure. This subsequently
causes the fluid on the longer side of the turbine blade to
have a lower pressure. The pressure difference acting
along the sides of the blade generates a net force. It is this
force that results in the rotational motion of the rotor. The
rotation of the rotor is then used to power an electric
generator that produces electrical energy.
Factors Affecting the Blade Profile Effectiveness.
Wind turbines are capable of rotating their blades to
optimize the angle of attack. This is the angle between the
oncoming flow and the blade, specifically the chord line
of the blade. This has a significant effect on how the air
flows past the blades, subsequently affecting the forces
exerted on the profile.
The magnitude of the winds velocity will also have
an effect on these forces. Higher speeds will often
generate increased forces on the turbine blades.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives for this project are as follows: to
develop an in-depth understanding of the CFD
functionality of the program ANSYS, to display an
understanding of FVM numerical methods to solve
complex problems related to fluid mechanics, to display
an understanding of boundary conditions and how to
implement them in CFD analysis, and to display an
understanding of the material learned in ENME 547. One
objective for this analysis is to find a specific blade angle
of attack that will result in a maximum resultant force for
a blade with geometry shown in figure 1. Another
objective for this analysis is to examine the relation
between the velocity of the moving air and the resultant
force acting on the blade.
Internal Deadline
Sept .23
Oct .09
Oct. 19
Oct. 19
Nov.9
Nov. 12
Nov. 12
Nov.27
Nov.27 Nov.30
Dec.1 Dec.5
Nov.27
External Deadline
Oct.10
Dec. 1
REFERENCES
Gangele, A., and Ahmed, S., 2013, "Modal Analysis
of S809 Wind Turbine Blade Considering Different
Geometrical and Material Parameters", Journal of The
Institution of Engineers (India): Series C, ISSN 22500545, 07/2013, Volume 94, Issue 3, pp. 225 228.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136403
2113001366
ANSYS (2014) Workshop 04: Fluid Flow Around the
NACA0012 Airfoil. ANSYS, Inc.
Bardina, J. E., Huang, P.G., Coakley, T.J., (1997).
Turbulence Modelling Validation, Testing, and
Development. NASA Technical Memorandum 110446.