University of Plymouth

PEARL https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk
The Plymouth Student Scientist - Volume 13 - 2020 The Plymouth Student Scientist - Volume 13, No. 1 - 2020

2020

A review of the technical challenges

faced in floating offshore wind turbine
deployment

Hill, O.
Hill, O. (2020) 'A review of the technical challenges faced in floating offshore wind turbine
deployment', The Plymouth Student Scientist, 13(1), p. 238-252.
http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/16512

The Plymouth Student Scientist

University of Plymouth

All content in PEARL is protected by copyright law. Author manuscripts are made available in accordance with
publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or
document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content
should be sought from the publisher or author.
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

A review of the technical challenges faced in

floating offshore wind turbine deployment

Oliver Hill

Project Advisor: Ming Dai, School of Engineering, Computing and Mathematics,

University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth, PL4 8AA

Abstract
The cost-effective deployment of floating offshore wind turbines is faced with a multitude of
technical challenges. Several key areas of the life-cycle of floating offshore wind turbines
have been discussed within this work. The key challenges and potential solutions have been
presented, with state-of-the-art literature summarised to enable further work to build off. It is
concluded that all areas of the use of this technology requires further maturing to de-risk this
technology to entice wide-spread commercial use.

238
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

Introduction
The utilisation of offshore wind energy is one of the most important sources of
renewable energy currently in development around the Globe, with Europe noted to
have the largest amount of potential floating wind capacity, at 4,000 GW [1].
Studies have found floating substructures for wind turbines to provide greater
advantages over the fixed-base platforms in water depths between 60m and 100m
[3]. Therefore, the maturing of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines (FOWTs) may be the
key to unlocking this increased availability of wind.

A limited number of Lifecycle Assessments (LCAs) have currently been conducted

on FOWTs, with LCAs mainly focussed on land-based and shallow water (<30m
water depths) installations [4], therefore the understanding of the risks and
challenges is currently limited for this technology, resulting in an increased need for
these assessments to mature this technology. This work aims to evaluate the
technical challenges currently present in literature with regards to the lifecycle of
FOWTs. To realise this, this paper is structured to analyse these challenges in the
order seen during the lifecycle of the deployment of this technology. Namely, the
economics of scaling up the technology, the design and structural challenges,
followed by the manufacture, installation and operational challenges present.

Economics and importance of “scaling up”

The economies of scale mean that wind farms are ever increasing in size to reduce
the Levelised Cost of Energy (LCOE) of this technology [5]. This has been predicted
to plateau after the installation of 600 FOWTs by around 10- 15%, dependent on
several factors such as substation configuration and vessel requirements [6].
Although increased turbine lifetime has also been noted to reduce the LCOE of the
installations, this reduction has been hypothesised to not be advantageous after 25
years, due to the additional probability of exposure to severe weather conditions
resulting in additional structural costs to withstand them [6]. However, cost reductions
are still possible in the research and development of more cost-efficient components
and maintenance procedures, such as the turbine itself and the foundation.

The increased size of turbines possible in FOWT systems has been also found to
lower the LCOE of the project, due to the increased turbine blade area [7].
Studies have found that LCOE of a 500MW FOWT farm at 50m water depth to be
lower than that of a fixed- bottom foundation wind farm in shallower waters [8], but
without physical installations, these estimations cannot be verified. However, the
scaling up of this technology should be conducted slowly, with small scale test sites
used to evaluate the performance of the technology before large-scale deployment of
arrays is conducted, de-risking designs, and allowing for unforeseen costs to be
discovered before it is a major problem, which could be catastrophic for large-scale
deployments.

Outlined by Crown Estate Scotland [9], the cost of the support infrastructure and the
availability of seabed rights are just two risks to mitigate for this technology, however
with suitable management this is possible. However, the proportion of the cost of the
turbine is lower for offshore projects than in land-based installations, decreasing
further as FOWTs are considered, due to the rising cost and complexity of the
foundation technology required for these locations [4]. It has been reported that for a
FOWT, only 21% of the cost is attributed to the turbine, with a further 67% for the

239
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

platform, compared to 45% and 33% for the turbine and foundations in land-based
applications [3]. This lower proportion of cost for the turbine in floating platforms may
lead to additional development opportunities for other wind turbine designs, such as
the Vertical Axis Wind Turbine (VAWT) discussed later.

Presented in Table 1 are the different locations and their respective foundations for
wind turbine installation, including their respective costs and power output [10]. It can
be observed that the capital expenditure and LCOE of FOWTs is predicted to be
over 4 times that of a land-based installation, indicating this technology to be cost
prohibitive. Yet, another source indicates that an installation of 100 Tension Leg
Platform (TLP)-based FOWTs would have an LCOE of $124 (£95)/MWh, competing
with the fixed-base offshore wind turbine LCOE of $179/MWh [11]. The first FOWT
farm to be installed has been reported to have a net capacity factor of 65% over the
first 3 months of operation [12], as well as other sources reporting predicting capacity
factors of greater than 50% for FOWTs [9]. This range of results indicates the current
difficulty in calculating the costs associated with this technology, requiring a
considerable range of factors utilising many assumptions for the LCOE to be
determined [13]. Nevertheless, the significant cost increase for FOWTs over land-
based systems is still a hurdle for developers.

It has been noted that a saving of 50% is possible for operation and maintenance
activities, which has been noted to comprise of one third of the cost of the energy
produced [14], with only 14.7% expected in construction and manufacture of load
bearing components [15], displaying the gap in knowledge of operating FOWTs
effectively, which is to be expected due to the lack of commercial installations
currently in operation. Also noted in Table 1 are the embodied CO2 amounts required
to manufacture and install a wind turbine in each location [16]. The shallow water
installations tend to have the highest CO2 requirement, noted to be due to the
machinery and materials used in the monopile installation for the foundation of the
turbine. This shows an advantage of FOWTs over their shallow water counterparts,
where they can be fully installed onshore and then towed into position for costs an
order of magnitude less than that of fixed-bottom offshore installations [1].

Turbine and floating platform design

Several factors affect the performance of wind turbines. Namely capacity factor,
operating wind speeds and turbine size. Capacity factor is a measure of the energy
produced by an installation, over the maximum output possible, providing an
indication on the efficiency of the installation. Relying heavily on the availability of the
wind, the move of wind turbines offshore aids in the removal of land barriers that
would restrict the flow of the wind, therefore increasing wind speeds and its
availability. Wind turbines can operate over a range of wind speeds, with designed
minimum and maximum wind speeds for operation. It is important to note that
maximum power output is not reached until the rated wind speed, where power output
plateaus above this speed [17]. At excessive speeds, braking systems are employed
to stop the turbine, preventing destruction of components, with some turbines using
a blade pitch adjusting system to feather the turbine blades to achieve this. These
systems will require additional support for use in the FOWT system, due to the
increased wind speeds and need for higher reliability due to the more remote nature
of these installations. As the installation of wind turbines in deep water locations
allows for the utilisation of larger wind turbines, blade lengths are ever increasing.

240
 The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

Increasing the turbine blade length has been shown require exponentially greater
mass [7], therefore better materials and construction techniques are required to
reduce this, possibly also aiding in the reduction of oscillatory forces, which are
detrimental to the fatigue life of the turbine.

Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbines (HAWT) have noticeably been the popular choice for
wind power generation over the past 20 years, resulting in a reducing LCOE as this
technology is matured. However, the LCOE reduction required to incentivise the
creation of FOWTs has be found to not be likely using HAWT [18].
Although most of the development in wind turbines has been used to mature the
“conventional”, horizontal design, research has also been conducted into the
feasibility of other designs, such as VAWTs [19]. As noted previously, the lower
proportional cost of the turbine within the FOWT system may lead to further
development opportunities for other turbine designs such as the VAWT, which may
lead to a lower LCOE for FOWTs.

The power generation capacity of VAWTs has not been increased to the same level
of HAWTs, with the largest found to be only 5MW [19]. With a lower centre of gravity
and simper design, the size (and therefore cost) of the platform required for stability
could be decreased [20], possibly increasing its attractiveness as a technology.
However, due to its lower maturity, there are more risks, with fewer case studies to
use, restricting the funding sources for this design, in favour of more mature
technology, HAWTs [20].
Table 1: Cost of Installations in Different Locations [9]

Turbine Type Capital Capital Operational Levelised Net Capacity CO2 Payback
Expenditure Expenditure Expenditure Cost of Factor (%) Period
($/kW) ($/MWh) ($/MWh/year) Energy (Months) [15]
($/MWh)
Land-Based 1,590 34.9 14.4 49 41.0 6
(2.16MW)

Fixed- 4,579 129.5 43.3 173 41.7 11

Bottom
Offshore
(4.71MW)

Floating 6,383 181.2 25.6 207 41.5 8

Offshore
(4.71MW)

Analysis of component reliability within a turbine has been a widely documented

process, which is of importance to operators to understand the overall reliability of
the systems that make up the FOWT [21]. Components such as the generator and
mechanical brake systems have been found to be more prone to damage due to
weather than other turbine components, only to be amplified more as further offshore
installations are developed, with the proximity to water showing higher corrosion and
failure rates over time. This is to be expected due to the presence of salt water,
known to increase corrosion of materials such as steel, which are abundant in the
design of wind turbines, showing the need for addition development to mitigate these
problems in a cost effective manner [22].

241
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

Currently there are three main types of floating platform used in FOWTs, focusing on
their simplicity for ease of manufacture; the TLP, Spar buoy and the semi-
submersible [1] [9] [23]. Table 2 shows the general capabilities of these three types.
The maximum water depth for fixed offshore wind turbines to be economically viable
has been noted to be 50m [2], with floating platforms found to be more desirable for
operation in water depths greater than this. This depth increase allows for greater
siting of installations to take advantage of the increased wind resource in previously
uneconomic locations.

Designs incorporating multiple turbines within one floating platform have also been
discussed, reducing the individual moorings and foundations required. However, the
larger scale of structures required for this system would require much larger capital
investments, resulting in a stagnation of development whilst adequate funding
sources are realised. Smaller developments however have been possible, with a
recent manufacture of a 1:6 scale dual-turbine model of the W2POWER, scheduled
for deployment in May 2019, with the project envisioned to utilise two 10-12MW
turbines at full scale [24].

Table 2: Commercial Floating Platform Types [22]

Platform Type Operating Turbine Number

Depth (m) Capacity Installed
(MW) Offshore

TLP 50-120 5-10 1

Spar - Buoy 50-120 5-10 6
Semi-Sub >50 5-10 1

Structural challenges and issues

The move of wind turbines to floating offshore locations introduces new engineering
challenges that must be overcome for successful operation. Although increasing the
size of the turbines allows for higher power generation capabilities, more advanced
materials and manufacturing techniques are required to provide cost-effective
reliability. Larger turbines, coupled with further offshore installations that utilise
floating platforms, leads to additional problems not seen on land projects.
The increased wind loading present in FOWTs, coupled with the addition of waves,
proves for additional stability problems, with some literature already evaluating this,
although further methods of analysis have been noted as being required to ensure its
effects on the structure is fully understood. The floating structure also provides new,
un-before seen challenges in the wind turbine industry that are crucial to the success
of the project. However, knowledge from the oil and gas industry, may be applied to
these problems [25]. As the structure of FOWTs is not fixed to the ocean bed,
systems are required to ensure station keeping, to prevent collisions or beaching, as
seen by other marine devices where moorings have failed [25]. For this reason, the
adequate design of mooring systems and other technologies is required to de-risk
the station keeping aspect of FOWTs.

242
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

The design of moorings has been a large area of study for the station keeping of all
marine-based power generation technologies. Mooring design literature has
discussed the optimal designs currently theorised for FOWTs, with work by
A. Campanile et al. [26] stating that 6-line mooring systems were the most suitable
for the station keeping of FOWTs at water depths of 50-350m, whilst providing the
greatest balance of lifetime cost, weigh and redundancy, when compared to 3 and 9-
line systems [26]. The use of wire ropes was found to not be a reasonable design
choice, due to the larger horizontal distances required when compared to chain
cables at depths around 100-250m [26]. This spacing problem is one area where the
requirements of this technology is different to that of the oil and gas industries, where
the spacing of FOWTs is much closer than that seen for oil rigs. Therefore, a hybrid
of cable chains and wire ropes has been identified as an area of further development
to possibly rectify this. However, the use of synthetic ropes has also been identified
as a low-cost alternative to wire ropes, due to their proven track record in the
offshore industry.

As stated by The Carbon Trust [1], the most likely source of failure in the FOWT is
expected to be from fatigue or corrosion, with the welding processes for the steel
structures used in wind turbines likely to influence the crack growth behaviour
significantly. Fatigue problems in turbine blades is a known problem, with ongoing
research into simulation and modelling of fatigue propagation. The inclusion of
additional forces present FOWTs, in the form of waves and more extreme weather
conditions heightens this problem for designers [27], where even the sway of the
floating platform may increase cyclic loading on the structures. For this reason, the
extended use of Fluid-Structure Interactions (FSI) and other tools is required to fully
evaluate systems placed into this extreme environment. Although the development
of such analysis processes is required to ensure adequate evaluation is conducted
[15].

When migrated from land-based installations to offshore installations, the corrosive

environment of seawater necessitated the redesign of components to improve
reliability. Prior research and experience gathered by the oil and gas industry will
provide an insight into the needs of these structures to withstand this environment,
reducing the redevelopment cost. Noted by Price and Figueira [28], corrosion
reduces the thickness of components, as well as crack initiation and in turn, fatigue.
For this reason, care must be taken to mitigate or reduce corrosion on FOWTs from
several conditions, such as the abrasive force from waves, micro-organisms and
chemicals.

This protection can take many different forms, from the passive protection given from
a coating to active protection, such as an Impressed Current Cathodic Protection
(ICCP), to reduce corrosion. Price and Figueira [28] also highlights how a
combination of both passive and active systems should be employed to protect a
structure from corrosion, for example, the ICCP system may be able to mitigate
corrosion in areas where to passive coating layer has been destroyed. Where
possible, these protective coatings should be applied thoroughly on land before the
structure is installed, with it noted that on-site repair of coatings on marine structures
is up to 50 times higher the original cost of application, €1000/m2, once logistics of
labour, materials and delays due to weather conditions are considered [29].

243
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

Manufacture
Wind turbines are complex structures, comprising of several subsystems atop a steel
tower, utilising composite turbine blades for weight-reduction. Ever increasing in
size, offshore commercial installations currently utilise 6MW turbines, with the
development of turbines of 20MW predicted [15] [30].
As mentioned previously, fatigue is a critical issue in the operations and
maintenance of a wind turbine. One area of research is the effect of the
manufacturing process of the composite blades in its fatigue characteristics [31]. An
example of this variation includes the use of infusion resin, designed to reduce the
amount of inclusions present within the component. However, during the curing
process, the low viscosity resin used for this process can move around within the
mould, due to small variations such as mould tension, causing areas of uneven
thicknesses, which can reduce the structural performance of the overall component,
as described by the National Research Council [32], highlighting the need for
improvements in the manufacturing process to limit this movement.

The design of the Floating Offshore Wind Platforms (FOWPs) relies heavily on the
experience gathered by the oil and gas industries for deep water operations [33].
This design reuse jump-starts the maturity in this industry, de-risking this technology
and increasing the funding channels of the project, when compared to other novel
designs that have not been used commercially by other industries. The use of design
standards developed by the oil and gas industry for floating structures will aid
significantly with the maturing of FOWP designs [34]. The performance of steel and
concrete FOWPs have been evaluated, each with their own advantages. Although
ultimately key design decisions should be based on project- specific factors, such as
the available construction infrastructure and weather conditions. The proximity of
ports to the installation location, as well as their size are key factors in determining
the best platform design and manufacture techniques to use.

Noted in work by Lindenberg [35], turbine material usage is predominantly steel, with
Glass-Reinforced Polymers (GRP) used for rotor blades. However, other key
materials such as carbon fibre will need significantly increased production capacities
to reach the future needs of turbines, with Lindenberg [35] stating that just the need
for carbon fibre in turbines within the United States will reach nearly 100 million
pounds per year. The only other material constraint noted by Lindenberg [35] was
the number of furnaces available for the curing of the GRP turbine blades. However,
it is expected that this requirement will be coupled with the need for even larger
ovens to cater for the ever-increasing size of turbines, especially employed by
FOWTs. Looking at the UK however, [9] reports all areas if the UK supply chain as
being ready, or having a clear path to readiness for FOWT manufacture [9]. The
integration of a FOWP into the FOWT system has been noted by the International
Renewable Energy Agency [36] as being a technical and commercial risk, however
close working with supply chains may mitigate the risk of use of this technology,
where communication of key risks and design challenges is paramount to the swift
discovery of solutions.

Although design simplicity is favoured for manufacture, only the spar-buoy and semi-
submersible FOWPs have been noted as particularly suitable for high- volume
production, necessary for the large-scale utilisation of this technology at a suitable
LCOE, with the TLP failing in comparison to these types [37].

244
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

To reduce the increasing pollution of the oceans, new materials and manufacturing
techniques should be developed to reduce the environmental impact, one key
example being the issue of micro-plastics and the electromagnetic fields created by
the power cabling, although additional habitats for marine life and birds could be
created by the installations, with additional fishing exclusion zones created by the
wind farm sites [30] [38].

Installation
The installation steps required for a FOWT can be summarised as follows [39]:

1. Float Out – Hook up to tug boats and float out from the launching site
2. Transit – Towing to the installation site
3. Installation – Mooring and ballasting operations conducted
4. Cable Installation – Laying of power cables to the new turbine and testing
procedures conducted
5. Termination – Connection to the power grid and disembarking FOWTs
6. Return – Transit of installation equipment and workers back to port

Ports with adequately deep harbour basins are a necessity for efficient construction
of FOWTs, for without this, transport to the sea would be time consuming and
prohibitively costly. The chartership of vessels and crews have also been noted to be
the main cost drivers for installation [39], depending highly on the proximity of the
port to the installation location, as well as the weather conditions.
Owing to the non-permeant nature of a floating platform over the fixed-base types,
the possibility of location adjustment is now possible. This moveable nature of the
FOWT has led to the development of technologies such as detachable electrical
connections for these devices [40], providing uninterrupted power distribution to
neighbouring devices, whilst allowing individual devices to be connected or removed
as required, possible for servicing or movement to more desirable areas. In doing so,
technologies such as this may lead to the ability for the cabling infrastructure to be
installed throughout an entire wind farm at once, without the need for individual cable
laying at the time of each FOWT’s installation, possibly leading to a cost decrease,
whilst simultaneously increasing the adaptability of the wind farm.

The installation of FOWTs excels in deep waters, negating the need for expensive
piling and construction vessels needed for fixed base installations. The installation of
wind turbines in conventional fixed-base structures involves the fabrication of
typically a mono-pile foundation. Yet, the viability of these structures is usually
limited to operating water depths of below 30m [2]. Below this depth, it has been
found to not be economically viable due to the restriction on maintenance and
maximum diver depths, as well as the size of structure required [2]. The use of a
floating base structure for a wind turbine has currently allowed for operating depths
of 100m, providing a significant operational advantage over conventional systems for
the location of new installations, with the floating nature of this technology allowing
for greater depths as further analysis and development is conducted [2].

Analysis into the effect of misaligned wind and wave loads on FOWTs has been
conducted by [7], finding additional considerations into the location and construction
of the system is required. The more extreme conditions present in deep waters, as

245
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

well as making operating conditions worse for the FOWT, operation of the cable-
laying and maintenance vessels may also be impeded by these increased conditions,
incurring additional costs. However, the ability for larger turbines in these
environments may outweigh the additional costs incurred. FOWTs require only
towing to the installation location, whereas fixed-base structures require the use of
large vessels to install the structure into its final location. As noted previously, the
use of larger wind farms would allow for a reduction in LCOE, with the larger space
availability of deep water off-shore arrays allowing for the correct spacing of turbines,
as so to reduce the effect of wakes and inter-turbine interactions, further increasing
the efficiency of the wind farm. One key issue highlighted with the use of deep-water
offshore turbines, is the longer distances of cabling required for connection [41].
Cabling is expensive due to the material, installation and maintenance requirements,
therefore if this expense can be covered by a larger array of turbines they would be
more economically viable.

Parametric design tools have been developed for the whole life cost modelling of
offshore wind farms, including the installation of these devices, particularly useful in
the estimation of cable lengths required for connections to the substation [42],
however the results of models such as these have been noted to be particularly
sensitive to several factors, such as the site’s location and capacity of the installation.
Therefore, further development of these tools is required to provide higher accuracy
results for development. This is presumed to improve over time, as more FOWTs are
installed, providing more data points for these tools to be compared to.

Operation, maintenance and other key issues

The survivability and reliability of FOWTs is widely acknowledged as one of the
major challenges of this technology, with the maintenance tasks of offshore wind
farms noted to comprise one third of the cost of energy produced [14]. The combined
wind and wave loading mentioned previously is a key topic of research in
understanding the needs of the design to withstand the repetitive and adverse forces
present between these two mediums. The key operations required in the upkeep of
the turbines and their platforms is also an important consideration. To reduce the
need for workers to inspect the installations, structural and environmental monitoring
sensors are being studied as potential replacements. Structural integrity monitoring
is a key component in ensuring operational capability of wind turbines [31] [43].

Literature reveals several projects that look to provide automated analysis of images
of turbine blades for surface cracks, which could lead to structural damage if not
properly maintained. Work into monitoring blade structure health, internal turbine
health and position monitoring of the structure are being developed, all working to
monitor the condition of separate sections of the turbine’s components [31] [44]. The
use of these sensors allows for the turbines health to be monitored remotely, with
data sent to monitoring stations, where structural failures could be predicted, and
suitable preventative measures assigned. As deep-water offshore installations are
more isolated than other deployments, a higher level of automation is required to
reduce the costs needed for physical assessments that may be costly to reach the
remote locations FOWTs are installed in. Systems such as those proposed by
Friedman et al. [45] allow for the monitoring of significant areas of the turbine system
using multiple technologies to identify a fault. However, the fault will still require
rectification, meaning that maintenance crews would still need to be assigned,

246
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

battling the remoteness and adverse weather conditions of the installation site each
time.

The adaption of monitoring and maintenance activities conducted in the deep-water

oil and gas industry may reduce the difficulty for these activities for FOWTs, were it
may be difficult due to the restriction on maintenance possible by humans at the
remote locations, resulting in the use of Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs). The
design of FOWT- specific ROVs coupled with the localised storage of components
with the highest failure rate, may aid in the reduction of crew-visits to each
installation, minimising most costs. However, development of such a system will be
costly, requiring input from all areas of the systems lifecycle and extensive validation
activities before this system could be relied on. The distance of offshore wind farms
from the mainland is an important consideration in the operation and maintenance
plans for these systems, inducing the need for remote monitoring technologies to
reduce the inspection visits required by crews, whilst simultaneously providing a
larger dataset for analysis and fault prediction to take place to better optimise crew
visits [44]. Various Condition Monitoring Systems (CMSs) have been developed to
achieve these required monitoring activities, recording parameters such as structure
vibration, temperature, rotor speed and power output, as well as factors such as
wind speed and direction, all at their specified sampling frequencies, tuned to
capture the required amount of data needed for evaluation and fault finding, whilst
simultaneously providing real-time feedback [44].

The failure rates of the different components of a fixed-base offshore wind turbine
have been evaluated in literature, electrical systems to have the highest annual
failure rates more than 0.5 in some cases, with an average downtime of around 2
days per failure [46]. However, due to the infancy of FOWTs, reliable data is not yet
available on failure rates or their effect on downtime. It is hypothesised that the
floating nature of FOWTs, coupled with their higher distances from shore will result in
more difficulty in accessing the components, increasing the downtime of installations.
The preventative strategy of replacing components before failure has also been
theorised, where components falling into different age groups may be replaced at the
same time as other repair procedures, minimising the visits required to a wind
turbine for maintenance [47]. Strategies such as this will aid in the minimisation of
maintenance procedures for FOWTs, where the remote nature of these installations
incurs high costs from maintenance crews. However, some maintenance procedures
cannot be performed on location, requiring the towing of the FOWT back to shore.
Blade maintenance is an example of this, where work to ensure structural integrity of
the blades is critical to the functionality of the turbine. Studies have confirmed that
the blades of a turbine are the most critical components of the system, “susceptible to
failure due to initiation and propagation of subsurface damage in a number of forms”
[48], therefore the development of monitoring tools is paramount to ensure safety
and structural integrity of FOWTs if the design and manufacture of these
components cannot be improved to reduce these issues.

The use of sensors and evaluation of the ambient noise have been noted to be of use
in the detection of damage in turbine blades for offshore installations [49], with other
work using novel techniques such as turbine blade crack detection using drones [43].
Novel techniques such as this could be developed to allow for greater automation in
the monitoring of remote FOWTs, however this technology requires maturing before

247
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

acceptance in the industry, through evaluation of its robustness in poor weather

conditions in the offshore environment.

Conclusion
This paper has presented a review of the technical challenges present in several key
areas in the deployment of floating offshore wind turbine technology. Based on the
current level of technology maturity in each of the area, the unique challenges and
potential solutions have been identified where possible. These key challenges
include the validation of the economies of scale predictions for large FOWT farms,
the development of improved construction materials to reduce the mass of the
increasing size of turbines, improved analysis techniques for the combined wind and
wave loading present on FOWT installations, the adaption of current manufacturing
techniques to improve the performance of large components such as turbine blades,
optimisation of the power cabling connections to reduce the large costs associated
with the long lengths needed for deep water offshore operations, and finally, the
development of innovative solutions to reduce the operational and maintenance
costs associated with the remote operation of these systems will enable cost
reductions noted to be up to 50%.

References
[1] The Carbon Trust, “Floating Offshore Wind: Market and Technology
Review,” The Carbon Trust, 2015.
[2] X. Wang, X. Zeng, J. Li, X. Yang and H. Wang, “A review on recent
advancements of substructures for offshore wind turbines,” Energy
Conversion and Management, vol. 158, pp. 103-119, 2018.
[3] M. Kausche, F. Adam, F. Dahlhaus and J. Grobmann, “Floating offshore
wind - Economic and ecological
challenges of a TLP solution,” Renewable Energy,
vol. 126, pp. 270-280, 2018.
[4] J. K. Kadellis and D. Apostolou, “Life cycle energy and carbon footprint
of Offshore Wind Energy.
Comparison With Onshore Counterpart,” Renewable Energy, vol. 108,
pp. 72-84, 2017.
[5] International Renewable Energy Association, “Offshore innovation widens
renewable energy options: Opportunities, challenges and the vital role of
international co-operation to spur the global energy transformation,” 2018.
[Online]. Available: https://www.irena.org/-
/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2018/Sep/IRENA_offshore_wind_
brief_G7_2018.pdf [Accessed 28 03 2019].
[6] A. Myhr, C. Bjerkseter, A. Agotnes and T. A. Nygaard, “Levelised cost
of energy for offshore floating wind turbines in a life cycle perspective,”
Renewable Energy, vol. 66, pp. 714-728, 2014.
[7] T. Ashuri, M. B. Zaaijer, J. R. Martins and J. Zhang, “Multidisciplinary
design optimization of large wind turbines—Technical, economic, and
design
challenges. Energy Conversion and Management,” Energy Conversion
and Management, vol. 123, pp. 56-70, 2016.

248
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

[8] Garrad Hassan, “Cost of energy of floating wind,” Garrad Hassan,

2012.
[9] Crown Estate Scotland, “MACROECONOMIC BENEFITS OF FLOATING
OFFSHORE WIND IN THE UK,” 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://www.crownestatescotland.com/maps-and-
publications/download/219 [Accessed 15 03 2019].
[10] National Renewable Energy Laboratory, “2016 Cost of Wind Energy,”
U.S. Department of Energy, Golden, 2016.
[11] CATAPULT, “Cost Modelling Analysis of Floating Wind Technologies:
Assessing the Potential of TLPWIND,” 10 2016. [Online]. Available:
https://ore.catapult.org.uk/app/uploads/2017/12/SP000 06-Cost-Modelling-
Analysis-of-Floating-Wind- Technologies.pdf. [Accessed 28 03 2019].
[12] Equinor, “World class performance by world’s first floating wind farm,” 02
2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.equinor.com/en/news/15feb2018-
world- class-performance.html. [Accessed 28 03 2019].
[13] L. Castro-Santos, E. Martins and C. G. Soares, “Methodology to
Calculate the Costs of a Floating
Offshore Renewable Energy Farm,” Energies, vol. 9, no. 5, p. 324, 2016.
[14] H. Seyr and M. Muskulus, “Decision Support Models
for Operations and Maintenance for Offshore Wind Farms: A Review,”
Applied Sciences, vol. 9, no. 278, 2109.
[15] J. H. Koh and E. Y. Ng, “Downwind offshore wind turbines_
Opportunities, trends and technical
challenges,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 54, pp.
797-808, 2016.
[16] J. Chipindula, V. S. V. Botlaguduru, H. Du, R. R. Kommalapati and Z.
Huque, “Life Cycle Environmental Impact of Onshore and Offshore
Wind Farms in Texas,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 2022, 2018.
[17] G. Lee, Y. Ding, M. G. Genton and L. Xie, “Power Curve Estimation
With Multivariate Environmental Factors for Inland and Offshore Wind
Farms,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, vol. 110, no.
509, pp. 56-67, 2015.
[18] M. J. Fowler, B. Owens, D. Bull, A. J. Groupee, J. Hurtado, D. T. Griffith
and M. Alves, “Hydrodynamic Module Coupling in the Offshore Wind
Energy Simulation (OWENS) Toolkit,” San Francisco, 2014.
[19] D. Griffith, T. Paquette and M. Barone, “A study of Rotor and Platform
Design Trade-offs for Large-scale Floating Vertical Axis Wind Turbine,”
Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 753, p. 102003, 2016.
[20] V. Leroy, “Unsteady aerodynamic modelling for seakeeping analysis of
Floating Offshore Wind. HAL ID: tel-02090543,” Central School of
Nantes, Nantes, 2018.
[21] M. Leimeister and A. Kolios, “A review of reliability- based methods for
risk analysis and their applicationin the offshore wind industry,”
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 91, pp. 1065-1076,
2018.

249
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

[22] L. Alhmoud and B. Wang, “A review of the state-of- the-art in wind-

energy reliability analysis,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 81, pp. 1643-1651, 2018.
[23] N. Bento and M. Fontes, “Emergence of floating offshore wind energy:
Technology and industry,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, vol. 99, pp. 66-82, 2019.
[24] J. Parfitt, “SPAIN’S FIRST TWO-HEADED FLOATING WIND TURBINE
EXPECTED TO BECOME ‘LOWEST COST SOLUTION’ FOR
RENEWABLE ENERGY FAR FROM
COASTLINE,” TheOlivePress, 19 04 2019. [Online]. Available:
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2019/04/19/spains-first-two-
headed-floating- wind-turbine-expected-to-become-lowest-cost-
solution-for-renewable-energy-far-from-coastline/. [Accessed 20 04
2019].
[25] M. J. Harrold, P. R. Thies and L. Johanning, “Dynamic Load Reduction
and Station Keeping
Mooring System for Floating Offshore Wind,” in 1st International
Offshore Wind Technical Conference ASME, San Francisco, 2018.
[26] A. Campanile, V. Piscopo and A. Scamardella,
“Mooring design and selection for floating offshore wind turbines on
intermediate and deep water depths,” Ocean Engineering, vol. 148, pp.
349-36, 2018.
[27] J. M. Peeringa, “Fatigue loading on a 5MW offshore wind turbine due to
the combined action of waves and current,” Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, vol. 524, 2014.
[28] S. J. Price and R. B. Figueira, “Corrosion Protection Systems and
Fatigue Corrosion in Offshore Wind Structures: Current Status and
Future Perspectives,” Coatings, vol. 7, no. 25, 2017.
[29] K. Muhlburg, “Corrosion Protection of Offshore Wind Turbines-a
Challenge for the Steel Builder and Paint applicator,” Journal of
Protective Coatings and Linings, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 20-32, 2010.
[30] J. K. Kaldellis, D. Apostolou, M. Kapsali and E. Kondili, “Environmental
and social footprint of offshore wind energy.Comparison with onshore
counterpart,” Renewable Energy, vol. 92, pp. 543- 556, 2016.
[31] J. Winstroth, L. Schoen, B. Ernst and J. R. Seume, “Wind turbine rotor
blade monitoring using digital image correlation: a comparison to
aeroelastic simulations of a multi-megawatt wind turbine,” Journal of
Physics: Conference Studies, p. 524, 2014.
[32] National Research Council, Division on Engineering and Physical
Sciences, Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems,
Committee on Assessment of Research Needs for Wind Turbine Rotor
Materials Technology, “Manufacturing Processes for Rotor
Blades,” in Assessment of Research Needs for Wind Turbine Rotor
Materials Technology, 1991, pp. 81-86.
[33] S. Lefebvre and M. Collu, “Preliminary design of a floating support
structure for a 5 MW offshore wind turbine,” Ocean Engineering, vol.
40, pp. 15-26, 2012.

250
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

[34] DNV, “DNV-OS-J103: Design of Floating Wind Turbine,” DNV, 2013.

[35] S. Lindenberg, 20% Wind Energy By 2030: Increasing Wind Energys'
Contribution to U. S. Electricity Supply, Springfield: U.S. Department of
Energy, 2008.
[36] International Renewable Energy Agency, “FLOATING FOUNDATIONS:
A GAME CHANGER FOR OFFSHORE WIND POWER,”
2016. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ewea.org/fileadmin/files/library/publicatio
ns/reports/Deep_Water.pdf. [Accessed 15 03 2019].
[37] M. Leimeister, A. Kolios and M. Collu, “Critical review of floating
support structures for offshore wind farm deployment,” Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, p. 1104, 2018.
[38] T. Wang, Z. Zou, B. Li, Y. Yao, J. Li, H. Hui, W. Yu and C. Wang,
“Microplastics in a wind farm area: A case study at the Rudong
Offshore Wind Farm,
Yellow Sea, China,” Marine Pollution Bulletin, vol. 128, pp. 446-474,
2018.
[39] D. Matha, C. Brons-Illig, A. Mitzlaff and R. Scheffler,
“Fabrication and installation constraints for floating windand
implications on current infrastructure and design,” in 14th Deep Sea
Offshore Wind R&D Conference, Trondheim, Norway, 2017.
[40] C. Cermelli, T. Duarte and C. Godreau, “Connection system for array
cables of disconnectable offshore
energy devices”. United States Patent US20160114863A1, 28 04 2016.
[41] K. Cradden, C. Kalogeri, I. M. Barrios, G. Galanis, D. Ingram and G.
Kallos, “Multi-criteria site selection for offshore renewable energy
platforms,” Renewable Energy, vol. 87, pp. 791-806, 2016.
[42] M. Shafiee, F. Brennan and I. A. Espinosa, “A parametric whole life
cost model for offshore wind farms,” The International Journal of Life
Cycle Assessment, vol. 21, no. 7, pp. 961-975, 2016.
[43] L. Wang and Z. Zijun, “Automatic Detection of Wind Turbine Blade
Surface Cracks Based on UAV-taken Images,” IEEE Transactions on
Industrial Electronics, vol. 64, no. 9, pp. 7293-7303, 2017.
[44] J. Lian, O. Xai, X. Dong, Q. Jiang and Y. Zhao, “Health Monitoring and
Safety Evaluation of the Offshore Wind Turbine Structure: A Review
and Discussion of Future Development,” Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 2, p.
494, 2019.
[45] H. Friedman, C. Ebert, P. Kraemer and B.
Frankenstein, “SHM of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines— Challenges
and First Solutions,” 6th European Workshop on Structural Health
Monitoring - Fr.1.B.2, 2016.
[46] F. P. Santos, A. P. Teixeira and C. G. Soares, Operation and
Maintenance of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing, 2016, pp. 181-193.

251
The Plymouth Student Scientist, 2020, 13, (1), 238-252

[47] B. R. Sarker and T. I. Faiz, “Minimizing maintenance cost for offshore

wind turbines following multi-level opportunistic preventive strategy,”
Renewable Energy, vol. 85, pp. 104-113, 2016.
[48] H. Sanati, D. Wood and Q. Sun, “Condition Monitoring of Wind Turbine
Blades Using Active and Passive Thermography,” Applied Sciences,
vol. 8, no. 10, p. 2004, 2018.
[49] G. Failla and F. Arena, “New perspectives in offshore wind energy,”
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical,
Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 373, no. 2035, 2015.

252