THESIS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

IN
THERMO AND FLUID DYNAMICS

Development of Vortex Filament

Method for Wind Power
Aerodynamics
by

HAMIDREZA ABEDI

Department of Applied Mechanics

Division of Fluid Dynamics
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Gothenburg, Sweden 2016
Development of Vortex Filament Method for Wind Power Aerodynamics
HAMIDREZA ABEDI
ISBN 978-91-7597-360-9

© Hamidreza Abedi, 2016

Doktorsavhandlingar vid Chalmers tekniska högskola

Ny serie nr. 4041
ISSN 0346-718X

Department of Applied Mechanics

Division of Fluid Dynamics
Chalmers University of Technology
SE-412 96 Gothenburg
Sweden
Telephone: +46 (0)31-772 1000

Cover:
Free vortex wake modeling (subjected to turbulent inflow) for wind turbine aerodynamics.

This document was typeset using LATEX

Printed at Chalmers Reproservice

Gothenburg, Sweden 2016
Development of Vortex Filament Method for Wind Power
Aerodynamics

Hamidreza Abedi

Department of Applied Mechanics

Division of Fluid Dynamics
Chalmers University of Technology

Abstract
Wind power is currently one of the cleanest and widely distributed renewable energy
sources serving as an alternative to fossil fuel generated electricity. Exponential growth of
wind turbines all around the world makes it apt for different research disciplines. The
aerodynamics of a wind turbine is governed by the flow around the rotor, where the
prediction of air loads on rotor blades in different operational conditions and its relation
to rotor structural dynamics is crucial for design, development and optimization purposes.
This leads us to focus on high-fidelity modeling of the rotor and wake aerodynamics. There
are different methods for modeling the aerodynamics of a wind turbine with different levels
of complexity and accuracy, such as the Blade Element Momentum (BEM) theory, Vortex
method and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD). Historically, the vortex method
has been widely used for aerodynamic analysis of airfoils and aircrafts. Generally, it
may stand between the CFD and BEM methods in terms of the reliability, accuracy
and computational efficiency. In the present work, a free vortex filament method for
wind turbine aerodynamics was developed. Among different approaches for modeling the
blade (e.g. a lifting line or a lifting surface) and wake (e.g. a prescribed or a free wake
model), the Vortex Lattice Free Wake (VLFW) model known as the most accurate and
computationally expensive vortex method was implemented. Because of the less restrictive
assumptions, it could be used for unsteady load calculations, especially for time-varying
flow environment which are classified according to the atmospheric conditions, e.g. wind
shear and turbulent inflow together with the turbine structure such as yaw misalignment,
rotor tilt and blade elastic deformation. In addition to the standard potential method
for aerodynamic load calculation using the VLFW method, two additional methods,
namely the 2D static airfoil data model and the dynamic stall model were implemented
to increase capability of the free vortex wake method to predict viscous phenomena such
as drag and separation using tabulated airfoil data. The implemented VLFW method
was validated against the BEM and CFD methods, the GENUVP code by National
Technical University of Athens (NTUA), Hönö turbine measurement data and MEXICO
wind tunnel measurements. The results showed that the VLFW model might be used as
a suitable engineering method for wind turbine’s aerodynamics covering a broad range of
operating conditions.

Keywords: Free wake model, vortex method, unsteady aerodynamic load, fatigue loads,
wind turbine, forest canopy, large-eddy simulation, atmospheric turbulence

i
ii
Although to penetrate into the intimate mysteries of nature and thence to learn the true
causes of phenomena is not allowed to us, nevertheless it can happen that a certain fictive
hypothesis may suffice for explaining many phenomena.

Leonhard Euler (15 April 1707–18 September 1783)

iii
iv
 Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors, Professor Lars Davidson
and Professor Spyros Voutsinas for their support, enlightening discussions, brilliant advices
and encouragement. It was an unaccountable pleasure to work with them during these
five years. ”Thank you Lars and Spyros, words cannot describe how grateful you are”.
I would like to thank Ingemar Carlen at Teknikgruppen AB for his valuable advices
and insights. Special thanks go to Vasilis Riziotis and Petros Chasapogiannis for their
supports during the study visits in National Technical University of Athens (NTUA).
I am grateful to my best friend, Alireza Majlesi for his endless and excellent contribution.
I would like to thank my former colleagues, Mohammad Irannezhad for his valuable advices
and Bastian Nebenführ for his contribution to provide atmospheric turbulence data.
Thanks to all my colleagues and friends at the division of Fluid Dynamics and SWPTC
for creating a pleasant working atmosphere. Particularly, Ulla Lindberg-Thieme, Monica
Vargman, Ola Carlson and Sara Fogelström for their grateful supports.
I would like to thank my previous and present office mates, Oskar Thulin and Johanna
Matsfelt for making our shared office an enjoyable place where everything can be discussed.
My warmest and deepest sense of gratitude goes to my family; my father Abbas, the
first teacher in my life, who taught me dignity and loyalty; my mother, Maryam, the
teacher of love and kindness and my sister Fatemeh, for her companionship and patience.
Abbas, Maryam and Fatemeh, ”Thanks for your infinite love and support, I am so proud
of you”.
I would like to thank Dr. Gerard Schepers from Energy Research Centre of the
Netherlands (ECN) to provide the measurement data of MEXICO wind turbine which
have been supplied by the consortium carried out the EU FP5 project Mexico: ’Model
rotor EXperiments In COntrolled conditions.
The technical support of National Technical University of Athens (NTUA) to use the
GENUVP is gratefully acknowledged. (GENUVP is an unsteady flow solver based on
vortex blob approximations developed for rotor systems by National Technical University
of Athens).
This work was financed through the Swedish Wind Power Technology Centre (SWPTC).
SWPTC is a research centre for the design and production of wind turbines. The purpose
of the centre is to support Swedish industry with knowledge of design techniques and
maintenance in the field of wind power. The work is carried out in six theme groups and
is funded by the Swedish Energy Agency, by academic and industrial partners.

v
vi
 List of publications
This thesis consists of an extended summary and and the following appended papers:

H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Vortex method ap-

Paper A plication for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades”. EWEA 2013
Conference. Vienna, Austria, 4–7 February, 2013

H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Development of free

Paper B vortex wake method for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades”. EWEA
2014 Conference. Barcelona, Spain, 10–13 March, 2014

H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Development of free

vortex wake method for yaw misalignment effect on the thrust
Paper C vector and generated power”. 32nd AIAA Applied Aerodynamics
Conference. AIAA Aviation paper 2014-2847. Atlanta, GA, United
States, 16–20 June, 2014

H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Numerical studies of

the upstream flow field around a horizontal axis wind turbine”.
Paper D 33rd Wind Energy Symposium. AIAA SciTech paper 2015-0495.
Kissimmee, FL, United States, 5–9 January, 2015

H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Development of free vor-

tex wake model for wind turbine aerodynamics under yaw condition”.
Paper E 34th Wind Energy Symposium. AIAA SciTech paper 2016-1257.
San Diego, CA, United States, 4–8 January, 2016

H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. Enhancement of free

Paper F vortex filament method for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades.
Submitted to Journal of Solar Energy Engineering (2016)

H. Abedi, B. Nebenführ, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. Assessment

Paper G of the influence of turbulent inflow fields on wind-turbine power
production. to be submitted to a scientific journal (2016)

vii
 Division of work
All papers were written by H. Abedi, who also developed the VLFW code and performed
the numerical simulations including the prescribed wake models, free wake model and BEM
method. All simulations with GENUVP code were done during H. Abedi’s study visits at
National Technical University of Athens (NTUA) with the help of Petros Chasapogiannis.
In paper B, the CFD data provided by Denmark Technical University (DTU). In paper
C, the experimental data of Hönö wind turbine were provided by Anders Wickström and
Christian Haag from Scandinavian Wind AB. In paper D, E and G, the measurement
data of MEXICO wind turbine were provided by Gerard Schepers from Energy Research
Centre of the Netherlands (ECN) and have been supplied by the consortium which carried
out the EU FP5 project Mexico: ’Model rotor EXperiments In COntrolled conditions’.
In paper F, turbulent inflow fields generated by LES and synthetic turbulence (Mann
model) were provided by Bastian Nebenführ. Lars Davidson and Spyros Voutsinas, the
main supervisor and co-supervisor, respectively provided guidance and valuable discussion
during the project.

viii
 Contents

Abstract i

Acknowledgements v

List of publications vii

Contents ix

I Extended Summary 1
1 Introduction 1

2 Theory 5
2.1 Governing equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Helmholtz’s theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3 Potential flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.4 Correction methods for Biot-Savart’s law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3 Application 13
3.1 Vortex Lattice Free Wake (VLFW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.1.1 Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.2 Load Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2.1 The Standard Potential Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2.2 2D Static Airfoil Data Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.2.3 Dynamic Stall Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

4 Summary of papers 25
4.1 Paper A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.1.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.1.2 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.2 Paper B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.2.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.2.2 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.3 Paper C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.3.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.3.2 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.4 Paper D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.4.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.4.2 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.5 Paper E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.5.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.5.2 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

ix
4.6 Paper F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.6.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.6.2 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.7 Paper G . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.7.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.7.2 Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

5 Concluding Remarks 35

References 37

A Extended ONERA Model 43

II Appended Papers A–G 47

x
 Part I
Extended Summary
1 Introduction
The methods for predicting wind turbine performance are similar to propeller and heli-
copter theories. There are different methods for modeling the aerodynamics of a wind
turbine with different levels of complexity and accuracy, such as the BEM theory and
solving the Navier-Stokes equations using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD).
Today, an engineering model based on the Blade Element Momentum (BEM) method
is extensively used for analyzing the aerodynamic performance of a wind turbine where
it is based on the steady and homogeneous flow assumption and aerodynamic loads act
on an actuator disc instead of a finite number of blades. The BEM method is known
as the improved model of the Rankine-Froude momentum theory [8, 9], which was the
first model to predict inflow velocities at the rotor, where it assumes that the rotor can
be replaced by a uniformally loaded actuator disc, and the inflow is uniform as well.
Moreover, Prandtl’s hypothesis is the foundation of the BEM method, assuming that
a section of a finite wing behaves as a section of an infinite wing at an angle equal to
the effective angle of attack. The BEM method is computationally fast and is easily
implemented, but it is acceptable only for a certain range of flow conditions [10, 11]. A
number of empirical and semi-empirical correction factors have been added to the BEM
method in order to increase its application range, such as yaw misalignment, dynamic
inflow, dynamic stall, tower influence, finite number of blades and blade cone angle [12],
but they are not relevant to all operating conditions and are often incorrect at high tip
speed ratios where wake distortion is significant [13]. The existence of the number of
correction formula leads to uncertainties to the BEM method, while the foundation of
such corrections is based on experimental results, decreasing the reliability of the BEM
method.
The vortex theory, which is based on the inviscid, incompressible and irrotational flow
(potential flow), can also be used to predict the aerodynamic performance of wind turbines.
It has been widely used for aerodynamic analysis of airfoils and aircrafts. Although the
standard method cannot be used to predict viscous phenomena such as drag and boundary
layer separation, its combination with tabulated airfoil data makes it a powerful tool
for prediction of fluid flow. Compared with the BEM method, the vortex method is
able to provide more physical solutions for attached flow conditions using boundary
layer corrections, and it is also valid over a wider range of turbine operating conditions.
Although it is computationally more expensive than the BEM method, it is still feasible
as an engineering method.
The early vortex method application was introduced by Glauert [14, 15], Prandtl [16]
and Goldstein [17]. In Glauert’s theory, instead of a finite number of blades, the rotor is
modeled as a uniformly loaded actuator disc and the wake is modeled as a semi-infinite
cylindrical sheet of vortices that is shed from the edge of an actuator disk. Prandtl’s
method introduced radial inflow distribution, which leads to the tip-loss factor concept

1
correcting the assumption of an infinite number of blades. Goldstein’s theory represents
the inflow by assuming the trailing vortices of each blade as a finite number of infinite
length coaxial helicoidal surfaces but with a finite radius moving at a constant velocity.
Falkner [18] used the vortex lattice method in 1943 to calculate aerodynamic forces on a
surface of arbitrary shape. This method is still used in engineering applications because it
requires relatively small computational time with a level of accuracy compared with CFD.
Reviews of historical development of rotor aerodynamics have recently been published by
Okulov, Sørensen and van Kuik [19–23].

Figure 1.1: Schematic of prescribed vortex wake model

In vortex methods, the trailing and shed vortices are modeled by either vortex parti-
cles [24–26] or vortex filaments [27, 28] moving either freely, known as free wake [29–31]
or restrictedly by imposing the wake geometry, known as prescribed wake [32, 33]. The
prescribed wake requires less computational effort than the free wake, but it requires
experimental data to be valid for a broad range of operating conditions. The free wake
model, which is the most computationally expensive vortex method, is able to predict
the wake geometry and loads more accurately than the prescribed wake because of less
restrictive assumptions. Therefore, it can be used for load calculations, especially for
unsteady flow environment which are classified according to the atmospheric conditions,
e.g. wind shear and turbulent inflow together with the turbine structure such as yaw
misalignment, rotor tilt and blade elastic deformation [34]. However, its application is
limited to attached flow and it must be linked to tabulated airfoil data to predict the air
loads in the presence of the drag and the flow separation.
The vortex method has historically been used for helicopters [35–37] to model the wake
and aerodynamic loads for different operational conditions. Landgrebe [38] developed a
prescribed wake consisting of a number of filaments shed into the wake from the blade
trailing edge that are rolled up immediately into a tip vortex. An analytical approach to
predict propellers’ inflow by using lifting line theory, was described by Crimi [39], where
the wake is replaced by a single tip vortex and moved based on the induced velocity field
during the blade rotation. Several simplified methods by Brady [40] and Trenka [41]

2
have been developed to model the wake by vortex rings or vortex tubes. Landgrebe [38],
Leishman [42] and Sadler [43] also proposed a free wake model for helicopters, where
the wake is modeled by segmented vortex filaments which are allowed to distort freely.
For wind turbine applications, Coton [44], Dumitrescu [45], Kocurek [46] and Curin [47]
introduced the prescribed vortex filament wake model in addition to a work by Gohard [48],
which is regarded as a pioneer free wake model for wind turbines.

Figure 1.2: Schematic of free vortex wake model

Finally, CFD, which solves the Navier-Stokes equations for the flow around the rotor
blade [49–54], is known as the most accurate but computationally most expensive method
making it an impractical engineering method for wind turbine applications, at least with
the current computational hardware resources.
To overcome this limitation, a combination of Navier-Stokes equations and an actuator
disc method was proposed by Madsen [55], where instead of resolving the viscous flow
around the rotor blades, the swept surface of the rotor blade is replaced by surface
forces acting upon the inflow. Another method called actuator line was proposed by
Sørensen [49] where the air load is distributed radially in the solution domain along the
lines representing the blade forces. In this method, the blade element method and airfoil
data are used to determine the aerodynamic loads while the wake is simulated by a 3D
Navier-Stokes solver. The hybrid CFD-Inviscid method was proposed by Berkman [56],
Xu [57] and Schmitz [58] in order to remove the dependency on the tabulated airfoil data
while a small region around the blade is solved by Navier-Stokes equations and a full
potential vortex method is applied for the rest of the computational domain.

3
4
2 Theory
2.1 Governing equation
The governing equation of an incompressible, inviscid fluid is given by Euler’s equations
expressing the conservation of mass and momentum as

∇⋅𝐯=0
𝜕𝐯 ∇𝑝 (2.1)
+ 𝐯 ⋅ ∇𝐯 = −
𝜕𝑡 𝜌

where 𝐯, 𝑡, 𝑝 and 𝜌 denote the velocity, time, pressure and density, respectively. Recall the
vorticity field is defined as the curl of a velocity field 𝛀 = ∇×𝐯, and for a constant-density
flow the curl of the inviscid momentum equation gives the inviscid vorticity transport
equation as
𝜕𝛀
+ 𝐯 ⋅ ∇𝛀 = (𝛀 ⋅ ∇) 𝐯
𝜕𝑡 (2.2)
𝐷𝛀
= (𝛀 ⋅ ∇) 𝐯
𝐷𝑡
where the right-hand side term denotes the tilting and stretching of vorticity (in an inviscid
fluid the vortex lines/tubes move with the fluid according to the Helmholtz theorem).
A region containing a concentrated amount of vorticity is called a vortex, where a vortex
line is defined as a line whose tangent is parallel to the local vorticity vector everywhere.
Vortex lines surrounded by a given closed curve form a vortex tube. A vortex tube of an
infinitesimal cross-section, immersed in irrotational fluid, is called vortex filament [59].
In rotor aerodynamics modeling, the vortical structure of a wake may be modeled by
either vortex filaments or vortex particles. In the vortex filament approach, each vortex
wake element is generally introduced as a straight line segment [60–66] containing two
points, one at the head and another at the tail, which are known as Lagrangian markers.
A vortex filament may also be presented as a curvilinear segment by fitting a parabolic
arc through three adjacent marker points [64, 67–69].

2.2 Helmholtz’s theorem

The dynamics of fluid elements carrying vorticity was proposed by Helmholtz for inviscid
transport of vorticity. According to Helmholtz’s theorem, the strength of a vortex tube
is constant along its length and does not vary with time. In addition, an irrotational
motion of an inviscid fluid started from rest remains irrotational. Lastly, a vortex line
cannot end in the fluid; it must form a closed path, end at a solid boundary or go to
infinity, implying that vorticity can only be generated at solid boundaries. Therefore, a
solid surface may be considered as a source of vorticity. This leads to replace the solid
surface in contact with fluid by a distribution of vorticity.

5
 The extension of Helmholtz’s theorem to take the viscosity effects into account [70] is
called Kelvin’s theorem given by
𝐷Γ 𝐷𝐯
=∮ ⋅ 𝐝𝐥 (2.3)
𝐷𝑡 u�
𝐷𝑡

where by replacing 𝐯 with Navier-Stokes’ equations, it may be written as

𝐷Γ ∇𝑝
= −∮ ⋅ 𝐝𝐥 + ∮ 𝜈∇2 𝐯 ⋅ 𝐝𝐥 (2.4)
𝐷𝑡 u�
𝜌 u�

where Γ and 𝜈 denote the circulation and kinematic viscosity, respectively. For an inviscid
and incompressible flow, Eq. (2.4) reduces to
𝐷Γ
=0 (2.5)
𝐷𝑡
where it implies that in the absence of density variations and viscosity, the circulation is
conserved; it is constant around any closed curve moving with the fluid. This is another
proof of of Helmholtz’s theorem which states that an irrotational motion of an inviscid
fluid started from rest remains irrotational.

2.3 Potential flow

An inviscid (𝜈 = 0), incompressible (∇ ⋅ 𝐯 = 0) and irrotational (∇ × 𝐯 = 0) flow is called
potential flow governed by Laplace’s equation as
∇⋅𝐯=0
𝐯 = ∇Φ (2.6)
∇2 Φ = 0
where Φ denotes the velocity potential. Solving Laplace’s equation with a proper boundary
condition yields the velocity field (𝐯) based on the velocity potential (Φ) where consequently
the pressure field may be determined using Bernoulli’s equation.
For a finite area of fluid, a quantity corresponding to vorticity is the circulation. In
other words, circulation is the amount of fluid vorticity in an open surface enclosed by
the curve where it is mathematically expressed (using Stokes’ theorem) as

Γ = ∮ 𝐯 ⋅ 𝐝𝐥 = ∫ (∇ × 𝐯) ⋅ 𝐧𝑑𝐴 = ∫ 𝛀 ⋅ 𝐧𝑑𝐴 (2.7)

u� u� u�

An illustration may be a vortex flow which is based on the incompressible (∇ ⋅ 𝐯 = 0) and

irrotational (∇ × 𝐯 = 0) flow [71] at every point except at the origin of the vortex (infinite
velocity). For a vortex flow (see Fig. 2.1), the tangential and radial velocity components
are then given by
𝐶
𝑣u� =
𝑟 (2.8)
𝑣u� = 0

6
where 𝐶 is obtained by taking the circulation (see Eq. (2.7)) around a given circular
streamline of radius 𝑟 as
Γ = ∮ 𝐯 ⋅ 𝐝𝐥 = 𝑣u� (2𝜋𝑟)
u� (2.9)
Γ
𝑣u� =
2𝜋𝑟
By comparing Eqs. (2.8) and (2.9), we get

Γ
𝐶= (2.10)
2𝜋
where Γ is termed the strength of the vortex flow. Equation (2.9) gives the velocity field
for a vortex flow of strength Γ and the circulation taken around all streamlines is the
same value, i.e. Γ = 2𝜋𝐶.

Figure 2.1: Vortex flow

According to vector analysis of fluid dynamics [13, 72, 73], any velocity field can be
decomposed into a solenoidal field (divergence-free) and an irrotational field (curl-free)
the so-called Helmholtz’s decomposition as

𝐯 = 𝐯u� + 𝐯u�
(2.11)
𝐯 = ∇ × 𝚿 + ∇Φ

where 𝚿 is a vector potential and Φ is a scalar potential. By definition, 𝐯u� is the velocity
field due to the vorticity in the flow and 𝐯u� is the irrotational velocity field required to
satisfy boundary condition in the presence of solid boundaries (zero-normal boundary
condition). Taking the curl of Eq. (2.11) yields

∇ × 𝐯 = ∇ × (∇ × 𝚿) + ∇ × ∇Φ = ∇ × (∇ × 𝚿) (2.12)

According to vector identity

∇2 𝚿 = ∇ (∇ ⋅ 𝚿) − ∇ × (∇ × 𝚿)
(2.13)
∇2 𝚿 = −∇ × (∇ × 𝚿)

7
where ∇ (∇ ⋅ 𝚿) = 0 since 𝚿 is a divergence-free solenoidal vector field (also known as a
vector stream function). From Eqs. (2.12), (2.13) and the definition of the vorticity field
(∇ × 𝐯 = 𝛀), Poisson’s equation for the vector potential is derived as

∇2 𝚿 = −𝛀 (2.14)

The solution of Poisson’s equation expressed by Green’s formula is

1 𝛀 (𝐱′ )
𝚿 (𝐱) = ∫ 𝑑𝐱′ (2.15)
4𝜋 u� ∣ 𝐱 − 𝐱′ ∣

where 𝐱 and 𝐱′ denote the position of point where the potential is computed and the
position of the volume element 𝑑𝐱′ , respectively. Generally, a prime denotes evaluation at
the point of integration 𝐱′ , which is taken over the region where the vorticity is non-zero
(the region occupied by fluid), designated by 𝑑𝐱′ . According to Helmholtz’s decomposition
(see Eq. (2.11)), any velocity field can be presented as the summation of a rotational
component which is induced by the vorticity field in an infinite space and a potential
component which is required to satisfy the boundary condition [72, 73]. Therefore, the
induced velocity (rotational component) field is obtained by taking the curl of Eq. (2.15)
as
1 (𝐱 − 𝐱′ ) × 𝛀 ′
𝐯u�u�u� (𝐱) = − ∫ 𝑑𝐱 (2.16)
4𝜋 u� ∣ 𝐱 − 𝐱′ ∣3
which represents the well-known Biot-Savart’s law. For a straight vortex filament of finite
length with the strength of Γ, the Biot-Savart law [74–77] is written as
Γ 𝐝𝐥 × 𝐫
𝐯u�u�u� = (2.17)
4𝜋 ∣ 𝐫 ∣3
It can also be expressed as
Γ (𝑟1 + 𝑟2 ) (𝐫1 × 𝐫2 )
𝐯u�u�u� = (2.18)
4𝜋 (𝑟1 𝑟2 ) (𝑟1 𝑟2 + 𝐫1 ⋅ 𝐫2 )
where 𝐫1 , 𝐫2 are the distance vectors from the beginning, 𝐴, and end, 𝐵, of a vortex
segment to an arbitrary point 𝐶, respectively (see Fig. 2.2).

2.4 Correction methods for Biot-Savart’s law

Biot-Savart’s law has a singularity when the point of evaluation for induced velocity is
located on the vortex filament axis. Likewise, when the evaluation point is very near to
the vortex filament, there is an unphysically large induced velocity at that point. The
remedy is either to use a cut-off radius, 𝛿 [78], or to use a viscous vortex model with
a finite core size by multiplying a factor to remove the singularity [42]. Apart from an
analytical solution of Biot-Savart’s law, a numerical integration over the actual filament
geometry, including smoothing methods to remove the singular part of Biot-Savart’s law,
may also be done to compute the velocity induced by a vortex filament [59, 67, 69, 70,
79–82].

8
 Figure 2.2: Schematic for Biot-Savart’s law

Correction of Biot-Savart’s law on the basis of the viscous vortex model can be done by
introducing a finite core size, 𝑟u� , for a vortex filament [59, 75, 83–86]. Since the induced
velocity field has a significant effect on the wake geometry and rotor aerodynamic loads,
a suitable viscous core model thus increases the accuracy of the entire flow field.
There are two general approaches representing the viscous vortex model. The first is
proposed based on the desingularized algebraic profile, i.e., a constant viscous core model
such as Rankine [87], Scully [79, 88] and Vasitas [89] models. The second approach is
a diffusive viscous core model where the vortex core size grows with time according to
Lamb-Oseen’s model [84]. In the present work, a constant viscous core model, which is
used extensively in engineering applications, is employed for the correction of Biot-Savart’s
law.
For rotorcraft applications, Bagai [90] suggested the velocity profile based on Vasitas’
model (see Eq. (2.19)) for 𝑛 = 2. Vasitas’ model is based on a general form of a
desingularized algebraic swirl-velocity profile for stationary vortices expressed as

Γ 𝑟2
𝑣u� (𝑟) = ( ) (2.19)
2𝜋𝑟 (𝑟u�2u� + 𝑟2u� )1/u�

where 𝑟, 𝑟u� and 𝑛 is the distance from a vortex segment to an arbitrary point, the viscous
core radius and an integer number, respectively. For 𝑛 = 1 and 𝑛 → ∞, Eq. (2.19)
resembles Scully’s model and Rankine’s model, respectively.
In order to take the effect of viscous vortex core into account, a factor of 𝐾u� must
be added to the velocity induced by a straight vortex filament of finite length given by
Biot-Savart’s law as
Γ (𝑟1 + 𝑟2 ) (𝐫1 × 𝐫2 )
𝐯u�u�u� = 𝐾u� (2.20)
4𝜋 (𝑟1 𝑟2 ) (𝑟1 𝑟2 + 𝐫1 ⋅ 𝐫2 )

where
ℎ2
𝐾u� = 1/u�
(2.21)
(𝑟u�2u� + ℎ2u� )

9
and ℎ is defined as the perpendicular distance of the evaluation point as (see Fig. 2.2)

∣ 𝐫u� × 𝐫u� ∣
ℎ= (2.22)
∣𝐋∣

Factor 𝐾u� desingularizes Biot-Savart’s equation when the evaluation point distance tends
to zero and prevents a high induced velocity in the vicinity region of the vortex core
radius. Figure 2.3 shows the effect of vortex viscous core model on the swirl (tangential)
velocity.

1
Vθ /(Γ/2πrc )

0 rc

-1

-2
-2 -1 0 1 2
r/rc
Figure 2.3: Tangential velocity induced by a straight infinite vortex filament using different
viscous core correction models, : ideal vortex, : Vasitas’ model (𝑛 = 2),
: Vasitas’ model (𝑛 = 3), : Vortex core

Generally, the distance parameter in correction factor (𝐾u� ) of Biot-Savart’s law

proposed by different models [42, 59, 73, 79, 83, 84, 89, 91], is the perpendicular distance
(ℎ) from the vortex filament segment to any arbitrary evaluation point. In other words,
the classical correction factor 𝐾u� does only take into account the perpendicular distance
between the vortex filament segment and the evaluation point regardless the geometrical
configuration between the evaluation point and vortex filament.

Figure 2.4: Schematic for correction of Biot-Savart’s law

10
 Van Hoydonck [67] showed that the classical correction factor 𝐾u� fails if the projection
of the evaluation point falls beyond the beginning and end of a vortex segment. He
proposed an improved correction factor 𝐾u� with respect to the beginning and end of a
vortex segment (see Fig. 2.4) where it is given by

⎧𝑑 = 𝑟1 , if cos 𝛽1 < 0;
𝑑2 {
where (2.23)
⎨𝑑 = 𝑟2 , if cos 𝛽2 > 0;
𝐾u� = 1/u�
(𝑟u�2u� + 𝑑2u� ) {𝑑 = ℎ, otherwise.
⎩

where
𝐫0 = 𝐫1 − 𝐫2
𝐫 𝐫
cos 𝛽1 = 1 0
𝑟1 𝑟0 (2.24)
𝐫2 𝐫0
cos 𝛽2 =
𝑟2 𝑟0
In the early stage of present work, following Bagai’s suggestion [90], a factor of 𝐾u�
was employed to desingularize Biot-Savart’s law. But later, 𝐾u� was defined according to
Eq. (2.23) proposed by Van Hoydonck [67].

11
12
3 Application
The rotor inflow distribution is a key parameter in studies of aerodynamic loads on rotor
blades and is highly dependent on the wake geometry. Hence, predicting the geometry
of trailing wake vortices and their strength makes it possible to analyze wind turbine
aerodynamic performance. In other words, suitable modeling of the blade and trailing
wake has a great influence on the prediction of air load at the rotor blade.
Modeling the blade and wake by vortex filament method may be done by different
approaches. In these methods which are constructed on the basis of some assumptions,
the blade is modeled by either lifting line (originally proposed by Prandtl in 1921) or
lifting surface, and the wake is modeled by either trailing horseshoe vortices or vortex
ring elements. This results in different rotor aerodynamic modeling such as lifting line
prescribed wake, lifting line free wake, vortex lattice prescribed wake and vortex lattice
free wake. In the prescribed wake model, the wake that is shed from the blade trailing

Figure 3.1: Schematic of different approaches, left: lifting line prescribed wake, middle:
lifting surface prescribed wake, right: panel method prescribed wake

edge follows the helix equation which consists of a helical sheet of vorticity approximated
by a series of points connected by a straight vortex filament with a constant diameter
and pitch. Hence, there is no wake expansion, and the wake elements move downstream
with a constant velocity including free stream and axial induced velocity, where the
interaction between the vortex wake filaments is ignored. In the free wake approach,
a finite number of vortex wake elements move freely based on the local velocity field,
allowing wake expansion as well. Each vortex wake element contains two points, one at
the head and another at the tail, which are known as Lagrangian markers. Movement of
these vortex wake elements by the local velocity field creates the wake geometry. For both
the prescribed and the free wake models, which are based on the inviscid, incompressible
and irrotational flow, it is assumed that the trailing wake vortices extend to infinity
(Helmholtz’s second theorem). However, since the effect of the induced velocity field
by the far wake is small on the rotor blade, the wake extends only for a limited length
downstream of the wind turbine rotor plane [92].
As stated before, the vortex flow is known as incompressible and inviscid flow. When
the blade is modeled as a lifting line, the viscous effect is directly taken into account by
using 2D airfoil data, where the generated power and thrust are calculated based on the

13
lift and drag forces. On the other hand, when the blade is modeled as lifting surface,
the power and thrust are calculated based on the potential lift (no viscous drag force)
where, in general, the lift coefficient, 𝐶u� , is a linear function of the angle of attack, e.g.
𝐶u� = 2𝜋 (𝛼 − 𝛼0 ), according to the thin airfoil theory. This means that the application
of lifting surface modeling is limited to attached flow and it must be linked to tabulated
airfoil data to predict air loads in the presence of drag and flow separation. Coupling
the potential solution of the lifting surface theory to the tabulated airfoil data for wind
turbine load calculation will be discussed in Section 3.2.

3.1 Vortex Lattice Free Wake (VLFW)

3.1.1 Modeling

Figure 3.2: Schematic of vortex lattice free wake

The vortex lattice method is based on the thin lifting surface theory of vortex ring
elements [74], in which the blade surface is replaced by vortex panels that are constructed
based on the airfoil camber line of each blade section (see Fig. 3.2). The solution of
Laplace’s equation with a proper boundary condition gives the flow around the blade
resulting in an aerodynamic load calculation, generating power and thrust of the wind
turbine. To take the blade surface curvature into account, the lifting surface is divided
into a number of panels, both in the chordwise and spanwise directions, where each panel
contains a vortex ring with strength Γu�,u� in which 𝑖 and 𝑗 indicate panel indices in the
chordwise and spanwise directions, respectively (see Fig. 3.3). The strength of each blade
bound vortex ring element, Γu�,u� , is assumed to be constant, and the positive circulation
is defined on the basis of the right-hand rotation rule.
In order to fulfill the 2D Kutta condition (which can be expressed as 𝛾u� .u�. = 0 in
terms of the strength of the vortex sheet where the 𝑇 .𝐸. subscripts denotes the trailing
edge) the leading segment of a vortex ring is located at 1/4 of the panel length (see
Fig. 3.4). The control point of each panel is located at 3/4 of the panel length meaning
that the control point is placed at the center of the panel’s vortex ring.

14
Figure 3.3: Blade construction using vortex panels

Figure 3.4: Numbering procedure

15
 The wake elements which induce a velocity field around the rotor blades are modeled
as vortex ring elements, and they are trailed and shed from the trailing edge based on
a time-marching method. To satisfy the 3D trailing edge condition for each spanwise
section, the strength of the trailing vortex wake rings must be equal to the last vortex
ring row in the chordwise direction (Γu� .u�. = Γu�u�u�u� ). This mechanism allows that the
blade bound vorticity is transformed into free wake vortices.
To find the blade bound vortices’ strength at each time step, the flow tangency
condition at each blade’s control point must be specified by establishing a system of
equations. The velocity components at each blade control point include the free stream
(𝐯∞ ), rotational (Ω𝐫), blade vortex rings self-induced (𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u�u� ) and wake induced
(𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u� ) velocities. The blade induced component is known as influence coefficient
𝑎u�u� and is defined as the induced velocity of a 𝑗u�ℎ blade vortex ring with a strength equal
to one on the 𝑖u�ℎ blade control point given by
𝑎u�u� = (𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u�u� ) ⋅ 𝐧u� (3.1)
u�u�

If the blade is assumed to be rigid, then the influence coefficients are constant at each
time step, which means that the left-hand side of the equation system is computed only
once. However, if the blade is modeled as a flexible blade, they must be calculated at each
time step. Since the wind and rotational velocities are known during the wind turbine
operation, they are transferred to the right-hand side of the equation system. In addition,
at each time step, the strength of the wake vortex panels is known from the previous time
step, so the induced velocity contribution by the wake panels is also transferred to the
right-hand side. Therefore, the system of equations can be expressed as
𝑎11 𝑎12 ⋯ 𝑎1u� Γ1 𝑅𝐻𝑆1
⎛
⎜ 𝑎21 𝑎22 ⋯ 𝑎2u� ⎞⎟ ⎛
⎜ Γ2 ⎞
⎟ ⎛
⎜ 𝑅𝐻𝑆2 ⎞
⎟
⎜
⎜ ⋮ ⎟
⎟ ⎜
⎜ ⎟
⎟ =⎜
⎜ ⎟
⎟ (3.2)
⋮ ⋱ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮
⎝𝑎u�1 𝑎u�2 ⋯ 𝑎u�u� ⎠ ⎝Γu� ⎠ ⎝𝑅𝐻𝑆u� ⎠
where m is defined as m = MN for a blade with M spanwise and N chordwise panels and
the right-hand side is computed as
𝑅𝐻𝑆u� = − (𝐯∞ + Ω𝐫 + 𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u� ) ⋅ 𝐧u� (3.3)
u�

The blade bound vortex strength (Γu�,u� ) is calculated by solving Eq. (3.2) at each time
step. At the first time step (see Figs. 3.5 and 3.6), there are no free wake elements. At
the second time step (see Figs. 3.5 and 3.7), when the blade is rotating, the first wake
panels are shed. Their strength is equal to the bound vortex circulation of the last row
of the blade vortex ring elements (Kutta condition), located at the trailing edge, at the
previous time step (see Fig. 3.7), which means that Γu�,u�2 = Γu� .u�.,u�1 , where the 𝑊 and
𝑇 .𝐸. subscripts represent the wake and the trailing edge, respectively. At the second time
step, the strength of the blade bound vortex rings is calculated by specifying the flow
tangency boundary condition where, in addition to the blade vortex ring elements, the
contribution of the first row of the wake panels is considered.
This methodology is repeated, and vortex wake elements are trailed and shed at each
time step, where their strengths remain constant (Kelvin theorem) and their corner points

16
 Figure 3.5: Schematic of generation and moving of wake panels at each time step

are moved based on the governing equation (see Eq. (3.4)) for the local velocity field,
including the wind velocity and the induced velocity by all blades and wake vortex rings.
The governing equation for the wake geometry is

Figure 3.6: Schematic of wake evolution at the first time step

𝑑𝐫
= 𝐯u�u�u� (𝐫, 𝑡) 𝐫 (𝑡 = 0) = 𝐫0 (3.4)
𝑑𝑡

where 𝐫, 𝐯u�u�u� and 𝑡 denote the position of a Lagrangian marker, the total velocity field
and time, respectively. The total velocity field, expressed in the rotating reference frame

17
Figure 3.7: Schematic of wake evolution at the second time step

Figure 3.8: Schematic of wake evolution at the third time step

18
i.e., 𝐯u�u�u� = 0, can be written as

𝐯u�u�u� = 𝐯∞ + 𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u�u� + 𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u� (3.5)

Different numerical schemes may be used for Eq. (3.4) such as the explicit Euler
method, the implicit method, the Adams-Bashforth method and the Predictor-Corrector
method. The numerical integration scheme must be considered in terms of the accuracy,
stability and computational efficiency. The first-order Euler explicit is is given by

𝐫u�+1 = 𝐫u� + 𝐯u�u�u� (𝐫u� ) Δ𝑡 (3.6)

where 𝐯u�u�u� is taken at the old time step.

According to the linear stability analysis done by Gupta [93], the Euler explicit method
is considered to be an unstable integration scheme. Small time steps can be used to
improve the stability of this scheme, but the very fine wake discretization, for example
2 − 6 degrees of azimuth, makes the free wake method computationally expensive.
The implicit scheme for a rotor wake application is defined as

𝐫u�+1 = 𝐫u� + 𝐯u�u�u� (𝐫u�+1 ) Δ𝑡 (3.7)

where 𝐯u�u�u� is taken at the current time step. The implicit scheme is a stable numerical
method. However, since it requires information from the current time step, a set of linear
equations must be solved at each time step, making it computationally too expensive and
impractical for the free wake method.
Higher order accurate schemes may be also used, such as the 2u�u� order Adams-
Bashforth, reading

1
𝐫u�+2 = 𝐫u�+1 + (3𝐯u�u�u� (𝐫u�+1 ) − 𝐯u�u�u� (𝐫u� )) Δ𝑡 (3.8)
2
Similar to the Euler explicit method, this scheme is numerically unstable for rotor wake
applications [93].
The predictor-corrector scheme is well known as a numerical scheme that improves
the stability of the explicit method. In the predictor step, the Euler explicit method is
used to get an intermediate solution for the Lagrangian markers’ position. The velocity
field in the corrector step is then calculated on the basis of the position of Lagrangian
markers computed in the predictor step. Mathematically, the predictor step is defined as

𝐫u�+1
̃ = 𝐫u� + 𝐯u�u�u� (𝐫u� ) Δ𝑡 (3.9)

and the corrector step becomes

𝐫u�+1 = 𝐫u� + 𝐯u�u�u� (𝐫u�+1

̃ ) Δ𝑡 (3.10)

The drawback of the predictor-corrector scheme is that it requires two velocity field
calculations at each time step which accordingly decrease the computational efficiency.

19
3.2 Load Calculation
In the vortex flow, the only force acting on the rotor blades is the lift force which can be
calculated either by Kutta-Jukowski’s theory or Bernoulli’s equation where the viscous
effects such as the skin friction and the flow separation are not included. Therefore, in
order to take into account the viscous effects and the flow separation, the potential lift
force must be combined with the aerodynamic coefficients through the tabulated airfoil
data along with the dynamic stall model to take the unsteady effects into account.
The currently developed VLFW model is based on the thin lifting surface theory of
vortex ring elements, where the body is part of the flow domain. Therefore, the effective
angle of attack is calculated based on the dynamic approach (force field) by projecting
the lift force acting on rotor blades into the normal and tangential directions with respect
to the rotor plane. In general, the predicted angle of attack computed on the basis of
the potential flow solution (i.e., the lifting surface theory) is always greater than that
calculated by the viscous flow. Therefore, it cannot be directly used as entry to look up
the tabulated airfoil data to provide the aerodynamic coefficients. This leads us to modify
the predicted angle of attack by introducing a method called the 2D static airfoil data
method (viscous solution).
In the 2D static airfoil data method, the new angle of attack is calculated by using the
tabulated airfoil data where it is directly connected to both the tabulated airfoil data and
the potential solution parameter (Γ). This angle of attack is used as the entry to look-up
the airfoil table and then we are able to calculate the lift, drag and moment coefficients
giving the lift and drag forces for each blade element. It is worth noting that both the
standard potential method and 2D static airfoil data method are based on the quasi-static
assumption.
In the fully unsteady condition, the lift, drag and moment coefficients are not following
the tabulated airfoil data curve (see Appendix A), they need to be corrected and this is
done by employing a dynamic stall model. Generally, the aim of the dynamic stall model
is to correct the aerodynamic coefficients under the different time-dependent events which
were described in the introduction. Hence, in case of uniform, steady inflow condition
and in the absence of the blade aeroelastic motion, it is not necessary to use the dynamic
stall model.

3.2.1 The Standard Potential Method

In the VLFW method, when the positions of all Lagrangian markers are calculated at
each time step, we are able to compute the velocity field around the rotor blade where, as
a consequence, the lift force can be calculated according to Kutta-Jukowski’s theorem.
The differential steady-state form of Kutta-Jukowski’s theorem reads

𝐝𝐋 = 𝜌𝐯u�u�u� × Γ𝐝𝐥 (3.11)

where 𝜌, 𝐯u�u�u� , Γ and 𝐝𝐥 denote the air density, total velocity vector, vortex filament
strength and vortex filament length vector, respectively.
Kutta-Jukowski’s theorem is applied at the mid-point of the front edge of each blade
vortex ring (see Fig. 3.9) and gives the potential lift force where the lift force of each

20
spanwise blade section is calculated by summing up the lift force of all panels along the
chord. In the present work, the lift force for each blade panel is computed using the

Figure 3.9: Lift collocation point

general form of Kutta-Jukowski’s theorem given by

ΔΓu�,u�
𝐋u�,u� = 𝜌𝐯u�u�u�,u�,u� × (Γu�,u� − Γu�−1,u� ) 𝚫𝐲u�,u� + (𝜌𝐴u�,u� 𝐧 ) (3.12)
Δ𝑡 u�,u�

where 𝚫𝐲u�,u� , 𝐴u�,u� , ΔΓu�,u� /Δ𝑡 and 𝐧u�,u� denote the width vector of a blade vortex panel
in the chordwise direction, blade vortex panel area, time-gradient of circulation and unit
vector normal to the vortex panel in which 𝑖 and 𝑗 indicate panel indices in the chordwise
and spanwise directions, respectively. Moreover, 𝐯u�u�u�,u�,u� is computed as

𝐯u�u�u�,u�,u� = 𝐯∞,u�,u� + Ω𝐫u� + 𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u�,u�,u� + 𝐯u�u�u�,u�u�u�u�u�,u�,u� (3.13)

The second term in Eq. (3.12) is the unsteady term which may be neglected for the
steady-state computations. For the blade panels adjacent to the leading edge, Eq. (3.12)

21
can be written as
ΔΓ1,u�
𝐋1,u� = 𝜌𝐯u�u�u�,1,u� × Γ1,u� 𝚫𝐲1,u� + (𝜌𝐴1,u� 𝐧1,u� ) (3.14)
Δ𝑡

The total lift of each blade section in the spanwise direction is obtained as
u�
𝐋u� = ∑ 𝐋u�,u� (3.15)
u�=1

where 𝑁 denotes the number of chordwise sections. Decomposition of the lift force for
each blade spanwise section into the normal and tangential directions with respect to the
rotor plane (see Fig. 3.10) gives the effective potential angle of attack for each section
where the angle is computed as

𝛼 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 (𝐹u� /𝐹u� ) − 𝜃u� − 𝜃u� (3.16)

where 𝛼, 𝐹u� , 𝐹u� , 𝜃u� and 𝜃u� represent the angle of attack, tangential force, normal force,
blade section twist and blade pitch, respectively.

Figure 3.10: Potential load decomposition

3.2.2 2D Static Airfoil Data Method

In potential flow, the lift coefficient is expressed by the thin airfoil theory which is a linear
function of angle of attack with constant slope equal to 2𝜋. This means that for the thick
airfoil, commonly used in wind turbine blades, the thin airfoil theory is no longer valid.
In addition, this assumption (linear relation of the lift coefficient and the angle of attack)
gives the higher the lift the higher the angle of attack. Hence, considerable lift reduction
due to flow separation at higher angles of attack cannot be predicted.
According to Kutta-Jukowski’s theory, the magnitude of the lift force per unit spanwise
length, 𝐿′ , is proportional to the circulation, Γ, and it is given by

𝐿′ = 𝜌𝑣u�u�u� Γ (3.17)

22
where 𝜌, 𝑣u�u�u� denote the air density and the total velocity magnitude, respectively. The
circulation for each spanwise section is equal to the bound vortex circulation of the last
row vortex ring element, located at the trailing edge. In addition, in the linear airfoil
theory, the lift coefficient is expressed by

𝐶u� = 𝑚 (𝛼 − 𝛼0 ) (3.18)

where 𝑚 = 2𝜋, 𝛼 and 𝛼0 indicate the slope, the angle of attack and the zero-lift angle of
attack, respectively. The lift coefficient is generally defined as

𝐿′
𝐶u� = 2 𝑐
(3.19)
0.5𝜌𝑣u�u�u�

where 𝑐 denotes the airfoil chord length. Combination of Eqs. (3.17), (3.18) and (3.19)
gives the modified angle of attack as

2Γ
𝛼= + 𝛼0 (3.20)
𝑚𝑉u�u�u� 𝑐

For an arbitrary airfoil, both 𝑚 and 𝛼0 are determined according to the 𝐶u� vs. 𝛼 curve
where the constant lift coefficient slope, 𝑚, is computed over the linear region (attached
flow). The modified angle of attack based on the Eq. (3.20) is used as entry to calculate
the lift, the drag and the moment coefficients through the tabulated airfoil data. As

Figure 3.11: Viscous load decomposition

a result, the lift and drag forces are computed for each blade element in the spanwise
section giving the tangential and normal forces acting on the rotor blade (see Fig. 3.11).

3.2.3 Dynamic Stall Method

The semi-empirical dynamic stall model, called the Extended ONERA is used to predict
the unsteady lift, drag and moment coefficients for each blade spanwise section based on

23
2D static airfoil data. In this model, the unsteady airfoil coefficients are described by a
set of differential equations including the excitation and the response variables, where
they are applied separately for both the attached and separated flows.
In the initial version of the ONERA model, the excitation variable is the angle of
attack with respect to the chord line whereas in the extended version, the excitation
variables are 𝑊0 and 𝑊1 , the velocity component perpendicular to the sectional chord
and the blade element angular velocity for the pitching oscillation, respectively.
Furthermore, compared with the initial version of the ONERA model, in the extended
model, instead of the lift coefficient (𝐶u� ), the circulation (Γ) which is responsible for
producing lift is the response variable. Also, the variation of the wind velocity is included
in the extended model which does not exist in the early version [94].
In the extended ONERA model, the lift (L) and the drag (D) forces are written as

𝜌𝑐 𝑆 𝑐 𝐾 𝑐
𝐿= [𝑣u�u�u� (Γ1u� + Γ2u� ) + u� 𝑊̇ 0 + u� 𝑊̇ 1 ] (3.21)
2 2 2
and
𝜌𝑐 2 𝜎 𝑐
𝐷= [𝑣u�u�u� 𝐶u�,u�u�u� + u� 𝑊̇ 0 + 𝑣u�u�u� Γ2u� ] (3.22)
2 2
where the symbol (),̇ 𝜌, 𝑐, 𝑣u�u�u� , Γ1u� , Γ2u� , 𝑊0 , 𝑊1 , Γ2u� and 𝐶u�,u�u�u� denote the
derivation with respect to time, air density, blade element chord length, total velocity,
linear circulation related to the attached flow lift, non-linear circulation related to the
separated flow lift, total velocity component perpendicular to the sectional chord, rotational
velocity of the blade section due to the pitching oscillation, non-linear circulation related
to the separated flow drag and linear drag coefficient, respectively. For detailed description
of other coefficients in Eqs. (3.21) and (3.22), see Appendix A.

24
4 Summary of papers
A brief summary of all publications presented in the appended papers is introduced in
this chapter.

4.1 Paper A
”Vortex method application for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades”

4.1.1 Summary
In this paper different blade models such as a lifting line method, a lifting surface method
(one bound vortex ring) and a panel method (several bound vortex rings) with prescribed
wake model were studied for wind turbine aerodynamics. For the lifting line and lifting
surface methods, the prescribed wake was introduced as horseshoe trailing vortices while for
the lifting panel method, it was constructed by vortex ring elements. For the steady-state
operating condition, the vortex ring elements are converted to the horseshoe trailing
vortices since there is no shed vortices (time-varying vortex wake elements). The aim was
to investigate the impact of blade and wake models on the aerodynamic loads together
with computational time efficiency. Because of the prescribed wake modeling, an iterative
method was employed to update the initialized helical vortex wake sheet (based on the
axial and circumferential velocities) generated by spanwise bound circulation difference
along the rotor blades. The 5-MW reference wind turbine was used under the steady-state
free stream and constant rotational velocity. The results of different approaches were
compared with the GENUVP code. The predicted forces by the lifting line method showed
a better agreement than those by the lifting surface and panel methods. This may reflect
the impact of the blade modeling on the generated power and thrust of a wind turbine.
Moreover, the normal and tangential forces were poorly predicted by the lifting surface
method because of neglecting the blade surface curvature.

4.1.2 Comments
It was concluded that the lifting line method predicts better circulation distribution
along the blade than the panel method since it is directly linked to the tabulated airfoil
data; the properties of each blade section airfoil are taken into account. However, in the
panel method, there is no relation between the blade profile properties and circulation
distribution along the blade obtained by imposing the zero-normal flow boundary condition.
This conclusion must be modified; since the panel method is based on the thin lifting
surface theory assuming a constant lift-curve slope equal to 2𝜋 per radian representing
the physical properties of each blade section airfoil. Since all calculations were done in the
global coordinate system (non-rotating frame), 𝑉u�u�u� must be changed to 𝑉u�u�u� . Instead of
the cut-off radius method, the viscous core model for correction of Biot-Savart’s law is
recommended.

25
4.2 Paper B
”Development of free vortex wake method for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades”

4.2.1 Summary
The outcomes of the previous paper gave an insight to choose a proper combination of
the rotor blade and wake models with less restriction and more accuracy. This led us to
develop a vortex lattice free wake (VLFW) method. Recall that in the VLFW model, the
blade is modeled as a lifting panel method which is equivalent to a lifting surface method
including several bound vortex rings both in the chordwise and spanwise directions; the
vortex wake elements emanating from the blades’ trailing edge move freely based on the
local velocity field. The developed time-marching VLFW model was used to calculate
the air loads for 5-MW reference wind turbine while it was assumed that the upstream
flow is uniform both in time and space, parallel to the rotating axis; the blades were rigid.
The results were compared with the BEM method, the GENUVP code and the CFD
simulation made by the RANS (Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes) solver. The first-order
Euler explicit numerical scheme was applied for the motion of the Lagrangian markers.
The angle of attack, normal and tangential forces along the blade were computed by
decomposing the potential lift force, given by Kutta-Jukowski’s theory, for each blade
spanwise section; they were compared with the above mentioned approaches. Apart from
the BEM method, the VLFW model is more efficient than CFD in terms of the simulation
time which makes it apt for wind turbine load calculations. The predicted power by the
potential VLFW model was higher than the BEM and CFD methods as expected. The
difference between the power predicted by the VLFW method (as potential flow) and
CFD (as viscous flow) led us to couple the potential based solution of the VLFW model
to tabulated airfoil data to predict air loads in the presence of drag and flow separation.

4.2.2 Comments
In page 3 of paper B, the numerator of correction factor 𝐾u� for Biot-Savart’s law in Eq.
(5) must be modified by replacing ℎu� by ℎ2 . It is also recommended to employ the new
correction factor proposed by Van Hoydonck (see Chapter 2). The simulation time for
the GENUVP code must be revised from 5.6 [hr] to 2 [hr].

4.3 Paper C
”Development of free vortex wake method for yaw misalignment effect on the thrust vector
and generated power”

4.3.1 Summary
Deviation of thrust vector relative to the generator shaft is known as one of the vibration
sources for a wind turbine in large yaw misalignment. The main purpose of this paper
was to study the deviation of thrust vector relative to rotor shaft for different yaw

26
misalignments and wind speeds. The developed time-marching vortex lattice free wake
(VLFW) and BEM methods were used for the simulations, and the results were validated
against the measurement data provided for a two-bladed variable speed machine. The
wind speed varied for each inflow direction deviated between −20 and 20 degrees with
respect to the rotor axis. The mean wind shear exponent was also extracted from the
experiments depending on the mean wind speed. Among different engineering methods
modifying the BEM method for yawed flow, the skewed wake geometry with trailing
vortices method was employed in the implemented BEM code. This method, which
is a function of blade azimuthal angle, gives the skewed axial induction factor as the
average of axial induction factor through a rotor revolution. In the VLFW model, the
aerodynamic forces were calculated using the standard potential method and 2D static
airfoil data method, based on the quasi-static assumption. The lift force and angle of
attack were computed by the standard potential method for each blade section according
to Kutta-Jukowski’s theorem where the viscous effects such as the skin friction and
the flow separation were not included. The major application of the 2D static airfoil
data method was to modify the angle of attack obtained from the standard potential
method. Contrary to the standard potential method, this modified angle of attack can be
used as the entry to look-up the airfoil table providing the lift and drag forces for each
blade element. The results showed that the 2D static airfoil data method might predict
more accurate results (thrust angle and generated power) than the standard potential
method and the BEM method with respect to the measurements. In addition to the yaw
misalignment making load imbalance over the turbine, vertical wind shear gives rise to
cyclic variation with period of 1P in the angle of attack. Lastly, the predicted power and
thrust angle deviation for the identical positive and negative yawed flows were not the
same due to the rotation direction of the rotor blades.

4.3.2 Comments
In the simulations made with the BEM method, the axial induction factor was only
corrected due to the yawed flow while the vertical wind shear was directly accounted for
each blade element. In the BEM implementation for sheared inflow, additional correction
for axial induction factor (as a function of azimuthal position and radial position of
blade elements) on the basis of local thrust coefficient must be taken into consideration.
This means that the simulation made with the BEM method must be revised including
the correction of axial induction factor for both the yaw misalignment and wind shear.
In the VLFW method, the lift force was calculated by the steady-state formulation of
Kutta-Jukowski’s theory whereas the yawed flow and sheared inflow make an unsteady
environment for a wind turbine. It is recommended to compute the potential lift force on
the basis of the unsteady formulation of Kutta-Jukowski’s theory to take the impact of
shed vortices on the total lift force into account, even if the upstream flow is steady in
time. Moreover, the 2D static airfoil data method must be modified in order to take the
impact of the separation point on the trailing and shed vortices into account. This may
be done using an iterative method the so-called decambering approach for the post-stall
prediction.

27
4.4 Paper D
”Numerical studies of the upstream flow field around a horizontal axis wind turbine”

4.4.1 Summary
The principal laws behind the BEM method are the ideal horizontal axis wind turbine
with wake rotation and 1D ideal rotor disc theories, respectively. These theories could
only estimate the axially and the tangentially induced velocities at the rotor plane; and
they can predict neither the induced velocity field upstream the rotor plane nor the
radial induced velocity. The impact of the axially induced velocity upstream the rotor
plane is to reduce a power reduction of the wind turbine. In this paper, the developed
time-marching VLFW code was used to study the impact of the rotor blade azimuthal
position, on upstream and downstream flow field near to the rotor plane. For this purpose,
the 3-bladed MEXICO wind turbine was used in the simulation and the results were
compared with the wind tunnel measurements. The velocity field was measured using the
PIV techniques for radial traverses in the horizontal plane, both upstream and downstream
of the rotor at different blade positions while the free stream was set to be uniform, steady
and perpendicular to the rotor plane. Overally, there was a good agreement between
the simulation and experiments while a constant difference between the calculated axial
velocity profile by the simulation and measurement data was referred to a reduction of
the streamwise velocity due to the open type wind tunnel employed in the measurements.
Downstream of the rotor blade, an abrupt change in the axial velocity component in
the blade tip region was reported due to the presence of the tip vortex varying with
respect to the azimuthal angle. The tip vortex position downstream of the rotor blades,
corresponded to the radial position of minimum axial velocity, was fairly well predicted
by the simulation. Apart from the negligible radial velocity component upstream the
rotor, the small radial velocity component downstream of the rotor was introduced as
the main source of the wake expansion which was verified by both the simulation and
measurements.

4.4.2 Comments
Although the turbine’s nacelle was not modeled in the VLFW simulation, it did not affect
the results since the PIV sheet position was not located at the nacelle’s wake. This means
that the effect of the nacelle is limited only for a certain length downstream the rotor,
but it is recommended to model the nacelle in the VLFW code.

4.5 Paper E
”Development of free vortex wake model for wind turbine aerodynamics under yaw
condition”

28
4.5.1 Summary

This paper aims to study the effect of the skewed wake, due to a yaw misalignment, on
the wake aerodynamics of a horizontal axis wind turbine. An asymmetrical attribute
of the yaw misalignment changes significantly the velocity field around the rotor blades
making a periodic load variation along the rotor blade which accordingly increases the
fatigue load. Moreover, the yaw misalignment makes a time varying and 3D aerodynamic
environment for a horizontal axis wind turbine because of the advancing and retarding
effect. The advancing and retarding effect occurs due to the lateral component of the
incoming velocity where the inflow at the rotor blade depends on the blade azimuthal
position. It also makes a temporal variation of the circulation around the blade section
which in turn influences the induced velocity field, even if the upstream flow is steady and
uniform. The simulations were made by the time-marching VLFW code where the results
were compared with the MEXICO wind turbine measurements. A preliminary study was
done to choose a suitable vortex core size employed in the free wake simulation. For
this purpose, the effect of the vortex core radius on the radial and axial streaklines was
investigated while the upstream flow was assumed to be steady and uniform (non-yawed
condition). It was found that, contrary to a large vortex core size, a small vortex core size
does not delay the vortex roll-up. However it makes the trailing wake vortices to deflect
earlier which consequently increases the wake instability. Comparing the radial and axial
streaklines of both non-yawed and yawed flows revealed that the trailing wake does not
expand symmetrically for the yawed flow which is in contrast to the non-yawed flow. In
addition, yaw misalignment makes the trailing wake to evolve periodically. According to
the MEXICO experiments, the velocity field was shown for the radial and axial traverses,
both upstream and downstream of the rotor. There was a good agreement between the
simulations and measurements for the tangential (𝑢) and axial (𝑤) velocities along the
radial traverses. A poor agreement for the radial velocity (𝑣) indicated that the rotational
effects on the wake aerodynamics of a wind turbine were not well captured by the vortex
method. It was also observed that the induction effect of the rotor blades on the radial
traverses is small both upstream and downstream except for the radial velocity component
which made the wake to expand radially. A significant change downstream of the rotor
for both axial and tangential velocities was reported due to the presence of the tip vortex.
Different signs and magnitudes of the tangential velocity along the downstream radial
traverse verified that the trailing wake expanded laterally and asymmetrically with larger
expansion downwind of the rotor plane rather than upwind of the rotor. The radial tip
vortex position downstream of the rotor blades verified the smaller wake expansion for
the yawed condition, close to the rotor plane, than for the non-yawed condition. There
was a good agreement between the simulation and measurement for the axial traverses
except for the regions where the turbine’s nacelle was not modeled. Apart from the radial
expansion of the trailing wake due to the positive magnitude of the radial velocity after
the rotor center, the behavior of the tangential velocity downstream of the rotor plane
indicated an unequal expansion and deflection of the wake moving forward. Further, the
periodic evolution of the trailing wake made the tangential velocity downstream of the
rotor plane to oscillate.

29
4.5.2 Comments
In page 6 of the paper, in the last paragraph and the second line of the end, IJ must
be changed to KL. It is also recommended to include the nacelle in the study of wind
turbine wake aerodynamics.

4.6 Paper F
”Enhancement of free vortex filament method for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades”

4.6.1 Summary
In this paper three different aerodynamic load calculation methods, namely standard
potential method (potential solution), 2D static airfoil data model (viscous solution) and
dynamic stall model were implemented in the Vortex Lattice Free Wake (VLFW) code.
The aim was to increase capability of the potential solution of the free vortex wake method
to predict viscous phenomena such as drag and separation using the tabulated airfoil data.
Predicted normal and tangential forces using the VLFW method were compared with the
Blade Element Momentum (BEM) method, the GENUVP code and the MEXICO wind
tunnel measurements. In the VLFW code, the lift force was calculated by Kutta-Jukowski’s
theory. The effective angle of attack was then computed by projecting the lift force into the
normal and tangential directions with respect to the rotor plane. However, the predicted
angle of attack could not be directly used as entry to look up the tabulated airfoil data to
provide the aerodynamic coefficients since it was obtained from the potential flow solution.
A remedy was to introduce a method called the 2D static airfoil data method (viscous
solution) to modify the predicted angle of attack calculated by the standard potential
method. This modification was achieved by combining both the tabulated airfoil data
and the potential solution parameter (Γ). Moreover, a semi-empirical model, called the
Extended ONERA model was added to the VLFW code to account for the dynamic stall
effects due to unsteady conditions. Two different turbines, NREL and MEXICO, were
used in the simulations to validate different load calculation methods implemented in the
VLFW code. For the NREL 5-MW machine, in addition to the power and thrust curves,
the angle of attack and tangential force along the rotor blade were studied and they were
compared with the BEM method and the GENUVP code. For the MEXICO turbine, two
different steady inflow conditions (with and without yaw misalignment) were employed
in the VLFW simulations. The tangential and normal forces acting on the rotor blades
were compared with the existing experimental data. The VLFW simulation for both the
MEXICO and the NREL 5-MW turbines showed that this method (vortex method) can
be used as a suitable engineering method for wind turbine’s aerodynamics covering a
broad range of operating conditions. For the non-yawed flow, apart from a rather good
agreement between the VLFW simulation and the MEXICO measurement in terms of
the tangential and normal forces along the blade, domination of the viscous phenomena
such as flow separation and stall condition for the higher freestream velocities made the
potential flow assumption less accurate. This certified the necessity of coupling the 2D
static airfoil data to the standard potential method for more accurate loads and power

30
prediction. For the yawed flow, the aerodynamic forces normal and parallel to the local
chord as a function of azimuthal position for the five radial stations along blade 1 were
compared with the MEXICO measurements. The potential solution and the measurement
data showed almost the same trend although the VLFW method overpredicted azimuthal
variation of the tangential and normal forces. Although the viscous solution made a slight
improvement in terms of magnitude of the tangential and normal forces, it could not
predict the trends, especially for the tangential force in the blade root region. However,
the dynamic stall solution made adjustment between the potential and viscous solutions.
The large offset between the simulation and the measurement was reported due to the
poor quality of the interpolated airfoil profile located at the transition region between
the Risø and NACA airfoils (0.6R). The VLFW simulations displayed a phase shift (at
almost all spanwise sections) compared with the experiments for both the normal and
tangential forces.

4.6.2 Comments
A deficiency in the streamwise velocity due to open type wind tunnel employed in the
experimental investigation has been reported. It is recommended to make the VLFW
simulation by taking the tunnel effect into account. As described in the paper, all
parameters for the dynamic stall method were chosen on the basis of the flat plate and
mean profile values since no wind tunnel measurement data founded for different airfoil
profiles constructing the MEXICO turbine’s rotor.

4.7 Paper G
”Assessment of the influence of turbulent inflow fields on wind turbine power production”

4.7.1 Summary
The effect of the turbulent inflow on the power production of a horizontal axis wind
turbine was studied in this paper. For this purpose, three different inflow methods, i.e. a
time series of atmospheric atmospheric boundary layer flow field (TS), Taylor’s hypothesis
(TH) and a steady-state mean wind profile with shear (PL) over a forest region and over
a flat terrain with low aerodynamic roughness (non-forest region) were employed. The
free vortex wake (VLFW) code was used to predict the aerodynamic loads for the NREL
5-MW turbine. Apart from the steady-state wind profile provided by the PL method, the
turbulent wind fields, TS and TH methods, were extracted from Large-Eddy Simulation
(LES) and synthetic turbulence (Mann model), respectively. In all three different inflow
methods, a constant mean speed was specified at the hub height for both forest and
non-forest regions. Furthermore, validity of Taylor’s hypothesis was investigated for both
forest and non-forest regions since its application is limited to flows with low turbulence
intensity. In the TS method, LES was used for simulating the atmospheric boundary
layer over a 20 [m] high, horizontally homogeneous forest region and over a non-forest
region while neutral stratification and periodic boundaries in the horizontal directions
were assumed. In LES, the incompressible, grid-filtered Navier-Stokes equations were

31
solved where the influence of the forest canopy and the Coriolis effect were introduced as
the source terms in the momentum equation. Additionally, a transport equation for SGS
turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) was solved to provide a velocity scale for modeling the
smallest eddies. In the TH method, a single three-dimensional wind field from synthetic
turbulence (Mann model) was generated where different input parameters were specified
for the non-forest and forest regions, respectively. In the PL method, the wind profile was
determined by the power law where the shear exponents were extracted over the rotor area
obtained from the LES for the non-forest and forest regions. Because of the time varying
turbulent inflow condition employed by the VLFW model based on the TS method, various
azimuthal resolutions for the wake segmentation were tested. The mean and the standard
deviation of power production were compared for different azimuthal rotor increments
resulting in the 10∘ resolution to satisfy both accuracy and computational efficiency. The
smaller mean power was predicted by the TH and PL methods with respect to the TS
method for both non-forest and forest regions while the presence of forest canopies reduced
the mean power as well. Recall that the generated wind field by both LES and synthetic
turbulence in the forest region had the same turbulence intensity at the hub height. The
smaller prediction of mean power by the TH method than the TS method led us to
investigate the application of Taylor’s hypothesis for flows with high turbulence intensity.
Despite the slightly lower standard deviation of fluctuating power in the forest region,
the PL method predicts the same mean power for forest and non-forest regions which is
inconsistent with the results of turbulent flow fields. The results showed that the presence
of the forest canopies increases the standard deviation of the turbine’s fluctuating power
giving rise to a higher level of fatigue loads. Moreover, because of the higher turbulent
kinetic energy (TKE) generated by LES, the standard deviation of fluctuating power for
the TS method was larger than the TH method. The histogram of the fluctuating power
production for the turbulent inflow methods showed that the forest canopies increase
the deviation of the instantaneous power production with respect to the mean power. In
addition, the effect of the forest region on the time varying power production and the
oscillating angle of attack for each spanwise section were more pronounced for the TS
method than the TH method. Validity of Taylor’s hypothesis was additionally studied
using the local convective velocity based on the cross correlating (space-time correlation)
of the fluctuating velocities at two arbitrary grid points which were axially separated by
a specified distance. The computed convective velocity exceeded the mean velocity for
the forest region increased the ambiguity of Taylor’s hypothesis application for flows with
high turbulence intensity. Moreover, the TH method was employed using a number of
boxes which were deliberately chosen among the 300 different synthetic turbulent fields
(identical input parameters but using different seeds for the random generation). Contrary
to the non-forest region, no distinctive pattern was observed to describe the variation of
mean power with respect to the turbulence level of flow field. This might be translated
into the uncertainty of using the TH method to study the influence of turbulent inflow
fields on wind-turbine power production, especially for the regions with high turbulent
intensity such as the forest canopies.

32
4.7.2 Comments
It is recommended to make the VLFW simulation for more rotor revolutions to analyze
dependency of the inflow turbulence and power production of a wind turbine. Likewise it
is recommended to study the effect of forest canopies with different densities on mean
power production.

33
34
5 Concluding Remarks
The aim of the project was to develop a vortex-based computational method for predicting
unsteady aerodynamic loads on wind turbine rotor blades. Among different blade models
such as a lifting line method, a lifting surface method and a panel method with either
prescribed or free wake model, it was found out that a combination of the panel method
(as rotor blade) and the free wake method the so-called vortex lattice free wake (VLFW)
method is the most accurate method. This led us to focus on developing a time-marching
VLFW method as the inviscid, incompressible and irrotational flow where its potential
solution was coupled to tabulated airfoil data and a semi-empirical model to take into
account the viscosity and the dynamic stall effects, respectively. The implemented VLFW
method was validated against the BEM and CFD methods, the GENUVP code by National
Technical University of Athens (NTUA), Hönö turbine measurement data and MEXICO
wind tunnel measurements where a quite good agreement was obtained.
It was determined that the accuracy of the VLFW model significantly depends on some
geometrical parameters such as the blade discretization (both spanwise and chordwise
sections), the discretization of the wake elements and the wake truncation length. In the
panel method the blade surface was constructed based on the airfoil camber line of each
blade section. A blade might be also modeled by a full panel method (including full airfoil
profile of each blade section) which provides more flow details around the rotor. However,
for load calculations, a camber line-based panel method gave satisfactory results in terms
of both accuracy and computational time efficiency. In addition, choosing an appropriate
vortex core size employed in the correction factor of Biot-Savart’s law was crucial for
evolution of the trailing wake vortices, especially for turbulent and yawed inflows.
Employing the unsteady form of Kutta-Jukowski’s theory was necessary to take the
impact of shed vortices on the total potential lift force into account. It was shown that the
2D static airfoil data method could remarkably modify the angle of attack obtained from
the standard potential method even though both of them were based on the quasi-static
assumption. It was also found out that an iterative method the so-called decambering
approach for the post-stall prediction could provide better approximation for viscous
effects than the 2D static airfoil data method. The adjustment role of the semi-empirical
dynamic stall method (between the potential and viscous solutions) the so-called Extended
ONERA model works quite well.
The results showed that the nacelle affected the air flow downstream the rotor for a
certain length which motivated to include the nacelle in the study of wake aerodynamics.
This led us to include a tower shadow model as well in future development of the VLFW
code.
The VLFW method was successfully used to study the influence of turbulent inflow
fields, extracted from either Large-Eddy Simulation (LES) or synthetic turbulence (Mann
model), on wind turbine power production. Because of the inflow’s turbulent fluctuations,
a chaotic motion of straight vortex wake filaments was observed while the impact of
vortex filaments stretching was neglected. Generally, a vortex filament stretching changes
the vortex core radius which accordingly affects the velocity induced by a vortex wake
element. A remedy is either to subdivide a vortex filament into two vortex filaments
when it is stretched beyond a specified length (constant vortex core size approach) or

35
to modify the vortex core radius based on the strain rate over a specified time period
(varying vortex core size). Taking a vortex filament stretching into account improves the
evolution of free vortex wake elements, however it increases the computational time.
In all prescribed and free wake models in this work, the blade was assumed to be
rigid. Nevertheless, the elastic deformation of rotor blades influences the wind turbine
performance. Hence, coupling the VLFW code into an aeroelastic solver would be
necessary. It is also worth mentioning that the developed VLFW code could handle all
sorts of temporal and spatial movements of components such as blade pitch regulation,
cone angle, shaft tilt and etc. which may be used for future studies.

36
References
[1] H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Vortex method application for aero-
dynamic loads on rotor blades”. EWEA 2013 Conference. Vienna, Austria, 4–7
February, 2013.
[2] H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Development of free vortex wake method
for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades”. EWEA 2014 Conference. Barcelona, Spain,
10–13 March, 2014.
[3] H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Development of free vortex wake method
for yaw misalignment effect on the thrust vector and generated power”. 32nd AIAA
Applied Aerodynamics Conference. AIAA Aviation paper 2014-2847. Atlanta, GA,
United States, 16–20 June, 2014.
[4] H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Numerical studies of the upstream flow
field around a horizontal axis wind turbine”. 33rd Wind Energy Symposium. AIAA
SciTech paper 2015-0495. Kissimmee, FL, United States, 5–9 January, 2015.
[5] H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. “Development of free vortex wake model
for wind turbine aerodynamics under yaw condition”. 34th Wind Energy Symposium.
AIAA SciTech paper 2016-1257. San Diego, CA, United States, 4–8 January, 2016.
[6] H. Abedi, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. Enhancement of free vortex filament
method for aerodynamic loads on rotor blades. Submitted to Journal of Solar Energy
Engineering (2016).
[7] H. Abedi, B. Nebenführ, L. Davidson, and S. Voutsinas. Assessment of the influence
of turbulent inflow fields on wind-turbine power production. to be submitted to a
scientific journal (2016).
[8] W. J. M. Rankine. On The Mechanical Principle of the Action of Propellers.
Transactions of the Institute of Naval Architects. Vol. 6, 1865.
[9] W. Froude. On The Elementary Relation between Pitch, Slip and Propulsive Effi-
ciency. Transactions of the Institute of Naval Architects. Vol. 19, 1978.
[10] M. O. L. Hansen. Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines. 2nd edition. EarthScan, 2008.
[11] J. N. Sørensen. General Momentum Theory for Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines.
Springer International Publishing Switzerland, 2016.
[12] A. van Garrel. Development of a Wind Turbine Aerodynamics Simulation Module.
ECN report, ECN-C–03-079, August 2003.
[13] L. J. Vermeer, J. N. Sørensen, and A. Crespo. Wind Turbine Wake Aerodynamics.
Progress in Aerospace Sciences 39 (2003), pp. 467–510.
[14] H. Glauert. The Elements of Airfoil and Airscrew Theory. University Press, Cam-
bridge, 1948.
[15] W. F. Durand. Aerodynamic Theory, A General Review of Progress Under a Grant
of the Guggenheim Fund for the Promotion of Aeronautics, Volume IV. Springer
Berlin Heidelberg, 1935.
[16] L. Prandtl. Application of Modern Hydrodynamics to Aeronautics. NACA Report
116. 1921.
[17] S. Goldstein. “On the Vortex Theory of Screw Propellers”. Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London. Vol. 123.

37
[18] V. M. Falkner. The Calculation of Aerodynamic Loading on Surfaces Of any Shape.
British Aeronautical Research Council. 1943.
[19] V. L. Okulov and J. N. Sørensen. Maximum efficiency of wind turbine rotors using
Joukowsky and Betz approaches. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 49 (2010), pp. 497–508.
[20] V. L. Okulov, J. N. Sørensen, and D. H. Wood. Rotor theories by Professor
Joukowsky: Vortex theories. Progress in Aerospace Sciences 73 (2015), pp. 19–
46.
[21] J. N. Sørensen and G. A. M. van Kuik. General momentum theory for wind turbines
at low tip speed ratios. Journal of Wind Energy 14(7) (2011), pp. 821–839.
[22] V. L. Okulov and G. A. M. van Kuik. The Betz-Joukowsky limit: on the contribution
to rotor aerodynamics by the British, German and Russian scientific schools. Journal
of Wind Energy 15(2) (2012), pp. 335–344.
[23] G. A. M. van Kuik, J. N. Sørensen, and V. L. Okulov. Rotor theories by Professor
Joukowsky: Momentum theories. Progress in Aerospace Sciences 73 (2015), pp. 1–18.
[24] D. G. Opoku, D. G. Triantos, F. Nitzsche, and S. G. Voutsinas. “Rotorcraft Aerody-
namic and Aeroacoustic Modeling using Vortex Particle Methods”. In Proceedings
of the 23rd International Congress of the Aeronautical Sciences, ICAS, Toronto,
Canada. 2002.
[25] S. G. Voutsinas, M. A. Beleiss, and K. G. Rados. “Investigation of the Yawed
Operation of Wind Turbines by means of a Vortex Particle Method”. AGARD
Conference Proceedings. Vol. 552. 1995, pp. 11.1–11.
[26] J. Zhao and C. He. A Viscous Vortex Particle Model for Rotor Wake and Interference
Analysis. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 55(1) (2010), p. 12007.
[27] T. A. Egolf. “Helicopter Free Wake Prediction of Complex Wake Structures Under
Blade-Vortex Interaction Operating Conditions”. In Proceedings of the 44th Annual
Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Washington, DC. 1988, pp. 819–832.
[28] A. Rosen and A. Graber. Free Wake Model of Hovering Rotors Having Straight or
Curved Blades. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 33(3) (1988), pp. 11–21.
[29] S. Gupta. Development of a Time-Accurate Viscous Lagrangian Vortex Wake Model
for Wind Turbine Applications. University of Maryland, Department of Aerospace
Engineering, 2006.
[30] S. D. Pesmajoglou and J. M. R. Graham. Prediction of Aerodynamic Forces on
Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines in Free Yaw and Turbulence. Journal of Wind
Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 86 (2000), pp. 1–14.
[31] S. G. Voutsinas. Vortex Methods in Aeronautics: How to Make Things Work.
International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics 20 (2006), pp. 3–18.
[32] J. J. Chattot. Helicoidal Vortex Model for Wind Turbine Aeroelastic Simulation.
Computers and Structures 85 (2007), pp. 1072–1079.
[33] J. J. Chattot. Optimization of Wind Turbines using Helicoidal Vortex Model. Journal
of Solar Energy Engineering 125 (2003), pp. 418–424.
[34] J. G. Holierhoek, J. B. de Vaal, A. H. van Zuijlen, and H. Bijl. Comparing Different
Dynamic Stall Models. Journal of Wind Energy 16 (2013), pp. 139–158.
[35] A. J. Landgrebe. The Wake Geometry Of a Hovering Rotor and its Influence on
Rotor Performance. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 17, No. 4 (1972),
pp. 2–15.

38
[36] J. D. Kocurek and J. L. Tangler. A Prescribed Wake Lifting Surface Hover Perfor-
mance Analysis. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 22(1) (1977), pp. 24–
35.
[37] T. A. Egolf and A. J. Landgrebe. Helicopter Rotor Wake Geometry and its Influence
in Forward Flight, Vol. 1 Generalized Wake Geometry and Wake Effects in Rotor
Airloads and Performance. NASA CR-3726 (1983).
[38] A. J. Landgrebe. An Analytical and Experimental Investigation of Helicopter Rotor
Hover Performance and Wake Geometry Characteristics. USAAMRDL Tech. Report
71-24, US Army Air Mobility Research and Development Laboratory, Fort Eustis.
June 1971.
[39] P. Crimi. “Prediction of Rotor Wake Flows”. CAL/U.S.Army Aviation Materiel
Laboratories Symposium Proceedings. Vol. 1. June 1966.
[40] W. G. Brady and P. Crimi. Representation of Propeller Wakes by Systems of Finite
Core Vortices. Cornell-Aeronautical Lab. Report No. BB-1655-5-2. February 1965.
[41] A. R. Trenka. Development of a Method for Predicting the Performance and Stresses
of VTOL-Type Propellers. U.S.Army Aviation Materiel Laboratories. June 1966.
[42] J. G. Leishman and M. J. B. A. Bagai. Free Vortex Filament Methods for The
Analysis of Helicopter Rotor Wakes. Journal of Aircraft 39 (2002).
[43] S. G. Sadler. “A Method for Predicting Helicopter Wake Geometry, Wake-Induced
Flow and Wake Effects on Blade Airloads”. 27th Annual National V/STOL Forum
of the American Helicopter Society. 1972.
[44] F. N. Coton and T. Wang. The Prediction of Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine
Performance in Yawed Flow using an Unsteady Prescribed Wake Model. Journal of
Power and Energy 213 (1999), pp. 33–43.
[45] H. Dumitrescu and V. Cardos. Wind Turbine Aerodynamic Performance by Lifting
Line Method. International Journal of Rotating Machinery 4(1) (1999), pp. 141–
149.
[46] D. Kocurek. Lifting Surface Performance Analysis for Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines.
SER/STR-217-3163 (1987).
[47] H. D. Curin, F. N. Coton, and B. Wood. Dynamic Prescribed Vortex Wake Model
for AERODYN/FAST. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 130 (2008).
[48] J. C. Gohard. Free Wake Analysis of Wing Turbine Aerodynamics. ASRL TR-184-14,
Aero, Struc. Research Lab., Dept. of Aeronautics, and Astronautics, MIT. 1978.
[49] J. N. Sørensen and W. Shen. Numerical Modeling of Wind Turbine Wakes. Journal
of Fluids Engineering 124 (2002), pp. 393–399.
[50] J. N. Sørensen. Aerodynamic aspects of wind energy conversion. Annual Review of
Fluid Mechanics 43 (2011), pp. 427–448.
[51] R. Mikkelsen. Actuator Disc Methods Applied to Wind Turbines. PhD dissertation,
Department of Mechanical Engineering, DTU, Lyngby, 2003.
[52] N. Troldborg. Actuator Line Modeling of Wind Turbine Wakes. PhD thesis, Fluid
Mechanics, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark,
June 2008.
[53] B. Sanderse, S. P. van der Pijl, and B. Koren. Review of computational fluid
dynamics for wind turbine wake aerodynamics. Journal of Wind Energy 14(7)
(2011), pp. 799–819.

39
[54] M. O. L. Hansen, J. N. Sørensen, J. A. Michelsen, and N. N. Sørensen. “A Global
Navier-Stokes Rotor Prediction Model”. 35th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit
Reno, NV, USA. 1997.
[55] H. A. Madsen. “A CFD Analysis for the Actuator Disc Flow Compared with Momen-
tum Theory Results”. Proceedings of the 10th IEA symposium on the aerodynamics
of wind turbines. The Technical University of Denmark, 1996, pp. 109–124.
[56] M. E. Berkman, L. N. Sankar, C. R. Berezin, and M. S. Torok. A Navier-Stokes/Full-
Potential/Free Wake Method for Rotor Flows. AIAA Paper 97-0401 ().
[57] G. Xu and L. N. Sankar. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering. 122(1) (2000),
pp. 35–39.
[58] S. Schmitz and J. J. Chattot. A Coupled Navier-Stokes/Vortex-Panel Solver for the
Numerical Analysis of Wind Turbines. Computers and Fluids 35 (2006), pp. 742–
745.
[59] P. G. Saffman. Vortex Dynamics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK,
1992.
[60] D. R. Clark and A. C. Leiper. The Free Wake Analysis - A Method for the Prediction
of Helicopter Rotor Hovering Performance. Journal of the American Helicopter
Society 15(1) (1970), pp. 3–11.
[61] T. A. Egolf and A. J. Landgrebe. A Prescribed Wake Rotor Inflow and Flow Field
Prediction Analysis. User’s Manual and Technical Approach. NASA CR-165894,
Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 1982.
[62] W. Johnson. Airloads and Wake Models for a Comprehensive Helicopter Analysis.
Vertica 14(3) (1990), pp. 255–300.
[63] A. J. Landgrebe. An Analytical Method for Predicting Rotor Wake Geometry.
Journal of the American Helicopter Society 14(4) (1969), pp. 20–32.
[64] A. Leonard. “Numerical simulation of interacting three dimensional vortex filaments”.
Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Numerical Methods in Fluid
Dynamics. Vol. 35 of series Lecture Notes in Physics. Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
1975, pp. 245–250.
[65] H. A. Saberi and M. D. Maisel. “A Free-Wake Rotor Analysis Including Ground
Effect”. 43rd Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, St Louis, MO. 1987,
pp. 879–889.
[66] S. G. Sadler. Main Rotor Free Wake Geometry Effects on Blade Air Loads and
Response for Helicopters in Steady Maneuvers-Theoretical Formulation and Analysis
of Results, Volume I. User’s Manual and Technical Approach. NASA CR-2110,
Langley Research Center, Langley, VA, 1972.
[67] W. Van Hoydonck. Computation of Rotorcraft Wake Geometry using NURBS. PhD
thesis, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands, 2013.
[68] D. B. Bliss, M. E. Teske, and T. R. Quackenbush. A New Methodology for Free
Wake Analysis Using Curved Vortex Elements. Tech. rep. NASA CR-3958, Ames
Research Center, 1987.
[69] A. Leonard. Vortex Methods for Flow Simulation. Journal of Computational Physics
37(3) (1980), pp. 289–335.
[70] G. H. Cottet and P. Koumoutsakos. Vortex Methods: Theory and Practice. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2000.

40
[71] J. D. Anderson. Fundamentals of Aerodynamics. 3rd edition. McGraw-Hill, 2001.
[72] O. M. Knio and A. F. Ghoniem. Numerical study of a three-dimensional vortex
method. Journal of Computational Physics 86(1) (1990), pp. 75–106.
[73] G. Batchelor. An Introduction to Fluid Dynamics. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, UK, 1967.
[74] J. Katz and A. Plotkin. Low-Speed Aerodynamics. 2nd edition. Cambridge University
Press, 2001.
[75] W. Johnson. Helicopter Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey,
1980.
[76] K. Karamcheti. Principles of Ideal-Fluid Aerodynamics. 2nd edition. Florida USA:
Krieger, 1980.
[77] A. Leonard. Computing Three-Dimensional Incompressible Flows with Vortex
Elements. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 17 (1985), pp. 523–559.
[78] A. V. Garrel. Requirements for a Wind Turbine Aerodynamics Simulation Module.
1st edition. ECN report, ECN-C-01-099. 2001.
[79] M. P. Scully. Computation of helicopter rotor wake geometry and its influence
on rotor harmonic airloads. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Massachusetts, MA, 1975.
[80] L. Rosenhead. “The Spread of Vorticity in the Wake Behind a Cylinder”. Proceedings
of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences.
Vol. 127(806). 1930, pp. 590–612.
[81] G. S. Winckelmans. Topics in Vortex Methods for the Computation of Three and
Two-Dimensional Incompressible Unsteady Flows. PhD thesis, California Institute
of Technology, Pasadena, CA, 1989.
[82] D. B. Bliss. The Dynamics of Curved Rotational Vortex Lines. MSc thesis, Mas-
sachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1970.
[83] J. G. Leishman. Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics. 2nd edition. Cambridge
Aerospace Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006.
[84] M. J. Bhagwat and J. G. Leishman. “Generalized Viscous Vortex Model for Appli-
cation to Free-Vortex Wake and Aeroacoustic Calculations”. 58th Annual Forum
and Technology Display of the American Helicopter Society International. Montreal,
Canada, Nov. 2002.
[85] M. Ramasamy and J. G. Leishman. A Reynolds Number Based Blade Tip Vortex
Model. Journal of the American Helicopter Society 52(3) (2007), pp. 214–223.
[86] M. Bhagwat and G. J. Leishman. Correlation of Helicopter Rotor Tip Vortex
Measurements. AIAA Journal 38(2) (2000), pp. 301–308.
[87] W. J. M. Rankine. Manual of Applied Mechanics. Griffen Co., London, 1858.
[88] M. P. Scully and J. P. Sullivan. Helicopter Rotor Wake Geometry and Airloads
and Development of Laser Doppler Velocimeter for Use in Helicopter Rotor Wakes.
Technical Report 183, MIT DSR No. 73032. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Aerophysics Laboratory, Aug. 1972.
[89] G. H. Vasitas, V. Kozel, and W. C. Mih. A Simpler Model for Concentrated Vortices.
Experiments in Fluids 11(1) (1991), pp. 73–76.
[90] A. Bagai and J. G. Leishman. Flow Visualization of Compressible Vortex Structures
using Density Gradient Techniques. Experiments in Fluids 15 (1993), pp. 431–442.

41
[91] A. Bagai. Contribution to the Mathematical Modeling of Rotor Flow-Fields using
a Pseudo-Implicit Free Wake Analysis. University of Maryland, Department of
Aerospace Engineering, 1995.
[92] H. Abedi. Development of Vortex Filament Method for Aerodynamic Loads on Rotor
Blades. Licentiate thesis, Department of Applied Mechanics, Chalmers University
of Technology, Göteborg, 2013.
[93] S. Gupta and J. G. Leishman. “Stability of Methods in The Free-Vortex Wake
Analysis of Wind Turbines”. 23rd ASME Wind Energy Symposium and the 42nd
AIAA Aerospace Science Meeting. Reno NV, May 2004.
[94] W. Bierbooms. A Comparison between Unsteady Aerodynamic Models. Journal of
Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 39 (1992), pp. 23–33.
[95] T. S. R. Reddy and K. R. V. Kaza. Analysis of an Unswept Propfan Blade With a
Semi empirical Dynamic Stall Model. NASA Technical Memorandum 4083. January
1989.

42
 Figure A.1: Hysteresis loop around the stall angle

A Extended ONERA Model

In steady flow, when the angle of attack for some blade regions exceeds from the critical
angle of attack (𝛼u�u�u�u�u� ), which is equivalent to the maximum lift coefficient (𝐶u�,u�u�u� ),
the flow is separated. This phenomenon is called static stall. This phenomenon, for an
airfoil in an unsteady flow, is associated with so-called dynamic stall where its major
effect is stall delay and an excessive force (see Fig. A.1). In other words, when an airfoil
or a lifting surface is exposed to time-varying pitching, plunging and incident velocity,
the stall condition happens at an angle of attack higher than the static stall angle which
means that the flow separates at a higher angle of attack than in steady flow. When
stall occurs there is a sudden decrease in lift. By decreasing the angle of attack, the flow
re-attaches again (stall recovery), but at a lower angle than the static stall angle [95].
This scenario, which is called dynamic stall, occurs around the stall angle and the result
is hysteresis loops and a sudden decrease of the lift coefficient. Hence, the dynamic stall
describes a series of event resulting in dynamic delay of stall to angles above the static
stall angle and it provides the unsteady evolution of lift, drag and moment coefficients
along the rotor blade.
In Eqs. (3.21) and (3.22), 𝑆u� , 𝐾u� and 𝜎u� are airfoil dependent coefficients. However,
in case of no wind tunnel measurement data, the flat plate values are applied as 𝑆u� = 𝜋
and 𝐾u� = 𝜋/2 for small Mach number. The term 𝜎u� is expressed by

𝜎u� = 𝜎0u� 𝛼 + 𝜎1u� ∣ Δ𝐶u� ∣ (A.1)

where for the flat plate, 𝜎0u� = 0 and 𝜎1u� = 0. Moreover, Δ𝐶u� = 𝐶u�,u�u�u� − 𝐶u�,u�u�u�u�
where the 𝐿𝑖𝑛 and 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡 subscripts represent the linear region and the static condition,
respectively (see Figs. A.2 and A.3). The linear circulation concerning the attached flow

43
 Figure A.2: Definition of the lift coefficient parameters in the ONERA model

lift (Γ1u� ) is calculated by the first-order differential equation as

2𝑉u� 2𝑉u� 𝑑𝐶u� 2𝑉u�

Γ̇ 1u� + 𝜆u� Γ1u� = 𝜆u� ( ) (𝑊0 − 𝑉u� 𝛼0 ) + 𝜆u� 𝜎 𝑊
𝑐 𝑐 𝑑𝛼 u�u�u� 𝑐 u� 1
(A.2)
𝑑𝐶
+ (𝛼u� ( u� ) + 𝑑u� ) 𝑊̇ 0 + 𝛼u� 𝜎u� 𝑊̇ 1
𝑑𝛼 u�u�u�

where 𝑉u� , 𝑑𝐶u� /𝑑𝛼 and 𝛼0 are the total velocity component parallel to the airfoil chord,
slope of the 𝐶u� vs. 𝛼 curve in the linear region and the zero-lift angle of attack of each
blade element, respectively.
The non-linear circulation concerning the stall correction of lift (Γ2u� ) is calculated by
the second-order differential equation as

2𝑉u� 2𝑉u� 2 2𝑉u� 2 2𝑉u�

Γ̈ 2u� + 𝑎u� Γ̇ 2u� + 𝑟u� ( ) Γ2u� = −𝑟u� ( ) 𝑉u� Δ𝐶u� − 𝑒u� 𝑊̇ 0 (A.3)
𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐

Furthermore, the non-linear circulation concerning the stall correction of drag (Γ2u� ) is
given by the second-order differential equation as
2 2
2𝑉 ̇ 2𝑉 2𝑉 2𝑉 ̇
Γ̈ 2u� + 𝑎u� Γ2u� + 𝑟u� ( ) Γ2u� = −𝑟u� ( ) 𝑉 Δ𝐶u� − 𝑒u� 𝑊0 (A.4)
𝑐 𝑐 𝑐 𝑐

In Eqs. (3.21), (A.2), (A.3) and (A.4), the symbol ()̇ denotes the derivation with respect
to time.
In the above equations, 𝜆u� , 𝜎u� and 𝛼u� depend on the specific airfoil type and they
must be determined from experimental measurements. If experimental data for a particular
airfoil are not available, these coefficients take the flat plate values as 𝜆u� = 0.17, 𝜎u� = 2𝜋,

44
 Figure A.3: Definition of the drag coefficient parameters in the ONERA model

𝛼u� = 0.53. 𝑑u� in Eq. (A.2) and the coefficients in Eqs. (A.3) and (A.4) are functions of
Δ𝐶u� due to the flow separation and they are defined as

𝑑u� = 𝜎1u� ∣ Δ𝐶u� ∣

𝑎u� = 𝑎0u� + 𝑎2u� (Δ𝐶u� )2
𝑎u� = 𝑎0u� + 𝑎2u� (Δ𝐶u� )2
√
𝑟u� = 𝑟0u� + 𝑟2u� (Δ𝐶u� )2 (A.5)
√
𝑟u� = 𝑟0u� + 𝑟2u� (Δ𝐶u� )2
𝑒u� = 𝑒2u� (Δ𝐶u� )2
𝑒u� = 𝑒2u� (Δ𝐶u� )2

The coefficients in Eq. (A.5) are airfoil dependent. In case of no wind tunnel measurements,
the values for a mean airfoil may be taken and the flat plate values cannot be used. For
the mean airfoil, 𝜎1u� = 0.0, 𝑎0u� = 0.1, 𝑎2u� = 0.0, 𝑟0u� = 0.1, 𝑟2u� = 0.0, 𝑒2u� = 0.0,
𝑎0u� = 0.0, 𝑎2u� = 0.0, 𝑟0u� = 0.1, 𝑟2u� = 0.0 and 𝑒2u� = 0.0.

45
46