Comparison of individual pitch and smart rotor control strategies for load reduction

Charles Edward Plumley, Bill Leithead, Peter Jamieson, E. Bossanyi, Mike Graham

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Load reduction is increasingly seen as an essential part of controller and wind turbine design. On large multi-MW wind turbines that experience high levels of wind shear and turbulence across the rotor, individual pitch control and smart rotor control are being considered. While individual pitch control involves adjusting the pitch of each blade individually to reduce the cyclic loadings on the rotor, smart rotor control involves activating control devices distributed along the blades to alter the local aerodynamics of the blades. Here we investigate the effectiveness of using a DQ-axis control and a distributed (independent) control for both individual pitch and trailing edge flap smart rotor control. While load reductions are similar amongst the four strategies across a wide range of variables, including blade root bending moments, yaw bearing and shaft, the pitch actuator requirements vary. The smart rotor pitch actuator has reduced travel, rates, accelerations and power requirements than that of the individual pitch controlled wind turbines. This benefit alone however would be hard to justify the added design complexities of using a smart rotor, which can be seen as an alternative to upgrading the pitch actuator and bearing. In addition, it is found that the independent control strategy is apt at roles that the collective pitch usually targets, such as tower motion and speed control, and it is perhaps here, in supplementing other systems, that the future of the smart rotor lies.
LanguageEnglish
Article number012054
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Physics: Conference Series
Volume524
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

rotors
Rotors
blades
wind turbines
Bearings (structural)
Wind turbines
Actuators
actuators
trailing edge flaps
speed control
wind shear
bending moments
yaw
requirements
upgrading
control equipment
towers
turbines
Motion control
Bending moments

Keywords

  • wind shear
  • smart rotor control
  • load reduction
  • multi-MW wind turbines
  • DQ-axis control

Cite this

@article{f0c399be24a44bd8b5875fd0237eec99,
title = "Comparison of individual pitch and smart rotor control strategies for load reduction",
abstract = "Load reduction is increasingly seen as an essential part of controller and wind turbine design. On large multi-MW wind turbines that experience high levels of wind shear and turbulence across the rotor, individual pitch control and smart rotor control are being considered. While individual pitch control involves adjusting the pitch of each blade individually to reduce the cyclic loadings on the rotor, smart rotor control involves activating control devices distributed along the blades to alter the local aerodynamics of the blades. Here we investigate the effectiveness of using a DQ-axis control and a distributed (independent) control for both individual pitch and trailing edge flap smart rotor control. While load reductions are similar amongst the four strategies across a wide range of variables, including blade root bending moments, yaw bearing and shaft, the pitch actuator requirements vary. The smart rotor pitch actuator has reduced travel, rates, accelerations and power requirements than that of the individual pitch controlled wind turbines. This benefit alone however would be hard to justify the added design complexities of using a smart rotor, which can be seen as an alternative to upgrading the pitch actuator and bearing. In addition, it is found that the independent control strategy is apt at roles that the collective pitch usually targets, such as tower motion and speed control, and it is perhaps here, in supplementing other systems, that the future of the smart rotor lies.",
keywords = "wind shear, smart rotor control, load reduction, multi-MW wind turbines , DQ-axis control",
author = "Plumley, {Charles Edward} and Bill Leithead and Peter Jamieson and E. Bossanyi and Mike Graham",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1088/1742-6596/524/1/012054",
language = "English",
volume = "524",
journal = "Journal of Physics: Conference Series",
issn = "1742-6588",
number = "1",

}

Comparison of individual pitch and smart rotor control strategies for load reduction. / Plumley, Charles Edward; Leithead, Bill; Jamieson, Peter; Bossanyi, E.; Graham, Mike.

In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series , Vol. 524, No. 1, 012054, 2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of individual pitch and smart rotor control strategies for load reduction

AU - Plumley, Charles Edward

AU - Leithead, Bill

AU - Jamieson, Peter

AU - Bossanyi, E.

AU - Graham, Mike

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Load reduction is increasingly seen as an essential part of controller and wind turbine design. On large multi-MW wind turbines that experience high levels of wind shear and turbulence across the rotor, individual pitch control and smart rotor control are being considered. While individual pitch control involves adjusting the pitch of each blade individually to reduce the cyclic loadings on the rotor, smart rotor control involves activating control devices distributed along the blades to alter the local aerodynamics of the blades. Here we investigate the effectiveness of using a DQ-axis control and a distributed (independent) control for both individual pitch and trailing edge flap smart rotor control. While load reductions are similar amongst the four strategies across a wide range of variables, including blade root bending moments, yaw bearing and shaft, the pitch actuator requirements vary. The smart rotor pitch actuator has reduced travel, rates, accelerations and power requirements than that of the individual pitch controlled wind turbines. This benefit alone however would be hard to justify the added design complexities of using a smart rotor, which can be seen as an alternative to upgrading the pitch actuator and bearing. In addition, it is found that the independent control strategy is apt at roles that the collective pitch usually targets, such as tower motion and speed control, and it is perhaps here, in supplementing other systems, that the future of the smart rotor lies.

AB - Load reduction is increasingly seen as an essential part of controller and wind turbine design. On large multi-MW wind turbines that experience high levels of wind shear and turbulence across the rotor, individual pitch control and smart rotor control are being considered. While individual pitch control involves adjusting the pitch of each blade individually to reduce the cyclic loadings on the rotor, smart rotor control involves activating control devices distributed along the blades to alter the local aerodynamics of the blades. Here we investigate the effectiveness of using a DQ-axis control and a distributed (independent) control for both individual pitch and trailing edge flap smart rotor control. While load reductions are similar amongst the four strategies across a wide range of variables, including blade root bending moments, yaw bearing and shaft, the pitch actuator requirements vary. The smart rotor pitch actuator has reduced travel, rates, accelerations and power requirements than that of the individual pitch controlled wind turbines. This benefit alone however would be hard to justify the added design complexities of using a smart rotor, which can be seen as an alternative to upgrading the pitch actuator and bearing. In addition, it is found that the independent control strategy is apt at roles that the collective pitch usually targets, such as tower motion and speed control, and it is perhaps here, in supplementing other systems, that the future of the smart rotor lies.

KW - wind shear

KW - smart rotor control

KW - load reduction

KW - multi-MW wind turbines

KW - DQ-axis control

UR - http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/

U2 - 10.1088/1742-6596/524/1/012054

DO - 10.1088/1742-6596/524/1/012054

M3 - Article

VL - 524

JO - Journal of Physics: Conference Series

T2 - Journal of Physics: Conference Series

JF - Journal of Physics: Conference Series

SN - 1742-6588

IS - 1

M1 - 012054

ER -