Anda di halaman 1dari 15

Analysis of a Grid Tied Induction Generator Wind Turbine

Steven Kreibach
Wichita State University

ABSTRACT the blades and shows analysis results of some of the


structural details undergoing some of the operating
A performance and structural analysis was done on forces that the structure is subjected to.
parts of the Breezy 5.5 Homebuilt Wind Turbine
Generator available from www.prairieturbines.com. The Breezy 5.5 is grid tied and uses a 3 phase induction
Twisted tapered blades were analyzed and compared to gear motor as a generator with a 14.5:1 gear ratio which
the existing non-twisted-non-tapered design. The results provides a constant rotational speed of 119 rpm. The
indicate that a rotor with 3 twisted tapered blades with rotor consists of 4 wooden blades carved with an un-
higher rotational speed can produce 17,000 KWh/year tapered un-twisted airfoil shape. Each blade is 10ft long.
depending on the probability distribution of the wind. Primary control is achieved through stall regulation.
The structural analysis shows generally low stresses and Overspeed is sensed and auxiliary protection is
a few details that uneven stress distributions. achieved with a small circuit that receives a generator
rpm input and shuts the turbine down upon overspeed.
INTRODUCTION Shutdown is achieved with an electromagnetic failsafe
brake. The turbine nacelle yaws with the wind on its
With the emphasis on renewable energy in society yaw bearing due to the response of the tail in the wind.
today, the homeowner is drawn to do his part not just for
the environmental benefits, but for financial reasons MAIN SECTION
also. A brief review of available wind turbines of the size
needed to offset the power use of the average home 1. Use published wind data to determine the size of
shows that the cost is substantial and the pay back wind turbine needed to produce at least 17,000
period long. One alternative for the homeowner is to KWh/year at 11000 E 39th St S, Derby KS, which is the
build a wind turbine himself with a variety of plans energy use for the residence there.
available.
The Kansas Corporation Commission has Mean Wind
One such plan is available from www.prairieturbines.com Speed and Mean Wind Power Density maps available
and is called the Breezy 5.5, named for its rated max for various heights on their web site at
output of 5.5 KW. With a few purchased components, www.kcc.state.ks.us/maps/.
the remaining structure is simple to build with straight
cuts, drilled holes, carved wood blades, welding of mild The wind power density is the power available per unit
steel, and only 1 machined part. The cost is reduced to rotor area in w/m2. This takes the probability density of
about a tenth the price of purchasing a commercially all the various wind speeds into account and greatly
available turbine, which reduces the payback period to simplifies wind turbine power output estimation. The
years instead of decades. average wind speed is commonly used but is less useful
in that it doesn’t take into account that the amount of
Other designs attempt to use clever ways of power available is a function of V3. The alternative is to
circumventing the head on force of nature, but the set up a tower with wind measurement equipment on it
Breezy 5.5 design withstands nature by brute force. and record the wind speeds at that particular site to get
This paper begins an analysis of the effect of changing the probability distribution of the wind. And that is

AE 878 Directed Project, Wichita State University, Department of Aerospace Engineering.


indeed necessary to establish a business case for a the cost of the machinery used to capture the power you
commercial turbine. However, the costs of such a test desire from the wind.
setup is easily more than the entire costs of a homebuilt
turbine. Therefore this is rarely done for the residential The power equation below shows how much power is
size wind turbine installation and instead an estimate is available in the wind per rotor area. This is only at one
used and you take what you can get. wind speed though. Notice that a doubling of wind
speed correlates to an 8 times increase in the power
contained in that wind.

Power in the wind = ½ ρ A V3

Where ρ is the density of air at the hub, A is the area


swept by the wind turbine blades, and V is the velocity of
the wind.

Not all that power can be captured. A study of


momentum theory and how it applies to wind turbines
shows that if you capture all that power, you have
reduced the wind velocity to zero and made the exit
stream of air have infinite area. Therefore there is a limit
Figure 1: Mean Annual Power Density at 30 meters to how much energy you can remove and still maintain
flow. That limit is the Betz limit and is 59%. This
The map in figure 1 reads 250 W/M 2 at 30 meters above corresponds to an axial induction factor of a=0.30.
ground level at the residence address. While the map Figure 2 shows the velocity slowdown at the rotor and
indicates “power density”, it’s not a density in the even more slowdown downstream.
traditional sense; mass per unit volume. Instead it
indicates the average power available per unit swept
area of the wind turbine rotor.

The Breezy 5.5 is on a 60 ft tall tower. The lowest wind


map available is for a hub height of 30 meters (98.7 ft).
Because the wind speed decreases near the ground, the
1/7th power law from [3] is used to correct the power
density down to the tower height of 60 ft.

Where u is the power density and z is the height above


ground level of the point in question. The corrected
power density is 233 w/m2.

The designers of the Breezy 5.5 use a lower resolution


wind data map from www.awea.org/faq/usresource.html,
2
which gives a mean average wind power of 350W/m
[1]. This is high compared to the higher resolution data Figure 2: Wind velocity in the stream tube and the axial
available today. However, the designers use this data induction factor a. [4]
only to determine that Breezy 5.5 has a coefficient of
performance (Cp) of 0.15 and not to predict its
To verify the breezy design with a 20 ft rotor diameter
performance. Their measurement of output is that it
we use the power density and multiply by various factors
produces 12000 KWh/year as measured by the KWh
to get the diameter of turbine required.
meter connecting it to the grid.

2
If the lower power density of 233 W/m is used, that
would increase the Cp estimate to 0.20. It’s nice to have
a super efficient turbine. But this is not the same
problem that automobiles have to try and conserve an
expensive fuel. Wind turbine fuel is free. The only
relevant argument for having a more efficient turbine is
The same equation is used to determine what size rotor wooden twisted tapered blade is more difficult to carve
area or efficiency of turbine will be needed to produce compared to un-twisted un-tapered blade and requires
17,000 KWh/year. The first equation below shows that a more material thickness to accommodate the twist.
Cp of .28 is needed if the rotor diameter were to remain Despite these problems, the project statement suggests
constant. the possibility of sourcing blades from a manufacturer
for comparison purposes. An example of such blades
are below and are available from
www.magnets4less.com.

Or, the next equation shows that we could instead


increase the diameter to 23.9 ft.

Since the goal of this paper is to compare 2 different Several important differences between the Breezy
blades, the attempt is made to reach a higher efficiency. blades and a possible replacement affect the
performance of the 2 different blades.
2. Estimate the coefficient of performance of the
Breezy 5.5 homebuilt wood 4 blade design and • 4 blades vs 3 blades
determine the viability of changing the blades to • Twisted vs un-twisted blade
commercially produced composite 3 blade design. • Tapered chord vs un-tapered chord
• Tip speed ratio of 6 gives 200 rpm vs the Breezy
The Cp of Breezy 5.5 was determined in the last section 119 rpm rotational speed
to be 0.20 and so the hope is that a twisted and tapered
blade would have the performance increase that we In addition to these differences, each blade must
desire for a Cp of 0.28. operate at various wind speeds which make the
blade operate at different angles of attack. The
The Breezy design uses a rotor with 4 blades made of interactions of all the different variables at each
wood. Each blade is carved out of a single 2x12, 10 ft radial location combine to produce the rotor
long and have an un-twisted and un-tapered airfoil performance vs wind speed. In this paper the Blade
shape which is constant along the length of the blade Element Momentum (BEM) method is used to
similar to a NACA 4412 airfoil. This airfoil will be used evaluate the 4 bladed Breezy rotor and the 3 bladed
to analyze both the breezy blades and is assumed to be composite rotor and compare their output at a
the airfoil of the prospective new blades for comparison variety of wind speeds. The designers of Breezy 5.5
purposes. Blade manufacturers don’t share their design measured the energy generation at the grid
and manufacturing processes because they are of a connected power meter to be 12,000 KWh/year of
competitive nature. Therefore this assumption is the generation [1] and so this provides a point of
only practical choice. reference.

The Breezy blades are designed to be easy to produce The BEM method is an iterative method from [5] and this
and that is a big benefit to the home-builder. Wood is paper includes Prandtl’s Tip Loss Factor in step 3 and
inexpensive, fatigue resistant, and easy to maintain. If the Glauert Correction for High Values of the axial
a blade breaks, another one can be made the same induction factor a in step 7.
way the originals were made to begin with. The wood
blades simplicity comes from having no twist or taper The BEM method is as follows from [5]. Begin by
which makes it easy to use a hand held portable planer dividing the blade into sections.
to form the initial airfoil shape.

While it may be easy to conceptualize that a twisted


and tapered blade would be superior, and easy to find
the twist and taper calculations, it’s quite another to
make a twisted tapered blade to any degree of accuracy
either in wood or especially in composite due to the
tooling costs and labor intensive nature. Composite 1. Initialize the axial induction factor a and the
blades have the disadvantage of being contrary to the radial induction factor a’. These will
spirit of home building. If the OEM composite blade converge to the right value upon iteration.
manufacturer cannot be found after 5 years, then the Figure 3 shows that a max value of
homebuilder has some redesigning to do. And a
performance is achieved at a=0.3. a’ tends
to be closer to zero.

Figure 5:Prandtl tip loss factor F vs radial


position for various number of blades (NB) and
wind speeds.

4. Compute the local angle of attack of the


Figure 3: Coefficient of thrust (Ct) & Coefficient of power airfoil.
(Cp) vs a [4]

2. Compute the flow angle Φ


5. Read Cl(α) & Cd(α) from experimental data
for the airfoil. These are the coefficients of
lift and drag, perpendicular and parallel to
the airfoil respectively.

To clarify some issues with lift and drag graphs


some discussion about Reynolds number (Re) is
needed. Re is a dimensionless quantity that
allows comparisons to be made from one size of
airfoil to another in different kinds of fluid.
Figure 4: Angles in the rotor plane showing the relative
velocity of the air Vrel when rotor speed is included [4].
Where Φ is the angle of Vrel to the rotor plane, θ is the
angle of the airfoil to the rotor plane, and α is the angle
of attack of the airfoil to Vrel. For the Breezy and the composite blades Re is
calculated and it’s found to be quite low
compared to much of the published data for
airfoils.

3. Compute Prandtl Tip Loss Factor F

The high-pressure air on one side of a blade


spills over the end of the blade seeking the low
pressure on the other side making tip vortices
which waste energy and create drag on the
blade. The Prandtl tip loss factor is a method of
including the effects of those tip losses. A
graph of those effects can be seen in figure 5. Additionally, the Cl & Cd change with Reynolds
number as shown in the figure below. It mainly
affects the response of the airfoil in the stall
region. While this graph is for a different airfoil,
it shows a trend. While conceptually the trend is
assumed to apply to the NACA 4412 airfoil, to
Where B is the number of blades, R is the include that in the analysis would probably be
radius of the rotor, r is the radial position of arbitrary and especially so because both blades
calculation, and e is the mathematical constant. would use the same data making the
assumption of questionable usefulness. This
results in the conclusion that more accurate lift
and drag is needed for more accurate results.
For a<ac, ac ~ .2

and a’
Figure 6: variation of Cl and Cd with angle of attack for
various Re [4]

8. If a & a’ have changed significantly from the


initial a & a’, then go to step 2, else quit.

9. Compute the forces on each blade element.

Figure 7: Cl and Cd curves from [4]


for NACA 4412 at Re 1.5 x 106

The data used is from [4] and shows lift and


drag at a higher angle than other data found for
this report. The lift and drag curves are
available in a variety of resources, however
most of them were tested with aircraft in mind
and tend to stop at the beginning of the stall
region. A stall regulated wind turbine sometimes
operates exclusively in this region during a time
when this estimation is important; max power
output. Unfortunately figure 7 represents the
best data the author could find and while it’s at a
Reynolds number that is too high, the blade
comparison using this data is assumed to be
useful even if not fully accurate.

6. Compute Cn & Ct which are the coefficients


of force normal to and tangential to the Where L is the lift on the airfoil perpendicular to
rotor plane. the chord, and ρ is the density of the air, and c
is the chord length.

Where D is the drag on the airfoil parallel with


7. Calculate a & a’ with Glauert Correction for the chord.
High Values of a. The Momentum theory
breaks down at higher values of a,
therefore some factor is needed to correct
the prediction. Note that these also use the
Prandtl tip loss factor F.

For a>ac, ac ~ .2 Where Pn and Pt are the force per unit blade
length normal and tangential to the rotor plane
respectively at that radial distance on the blade.
Then compute the force for each section from case where the probability distribution of the different
I=1 to N. The formula below is the point slope wind speeds is needed to see if the shifting of the blades
equation for a linear assumption between peak power wind speed is useful or not. This report did
sections where A is the slope and B is the y not pursue that analysis.
intercept.

Sum up all the sections to get the total thrust


force on the blade. Repeat for the Pn to get the
bending force on the blade.

10. Calculate blade in-plane and out-of-plane


moments where the moment is M. Figure 8: the effect of rpm on output for an example
turbine. [4]

Figure 8 shows an increase in power output as the RPM


and wind speed increases. But the faster an airfoil goes,
the greater the drag. To maximize the power output at
one rotational speed the turbine gives up performance at
another rotational speed, so the designer will need to
justify the output of his design at a variety of rotational
RESULTS OF BEM method speeds for the expected wind distribution at the
particular site. For instance, in the example turbine in
The calculations are in an accompanying excel figure 8 above, the 45 rpm turbine is making nearly 10
spreadsheet due to the large number of calculations for KW in a 6.5 m/s wind while the 60 rpm turbine is making
each blade section. The calculations at 23mph result in none. The 60 rpm turbine doesn’t match the
a Cp of the Breezy blades of 0.32, and for the twisted, performance of the 45 rpm turbine until 9 m/s wind
tapered blades of 0.38 which is a 18% increase in power speed. But after that the 60 rpm turbine greatly
output by changing the blades twist, taper, & RPM. surpasses the slower turbine. So there is a tradeoff that
only a complete analysis of all the options would show.
The Cp at 30 mph is 0.22 & 0.37 respectively, which is a
68% increase at that wind speed. Ideally the turbine rpm would increase or decrease
depending on the wind speed, and some turbines do
that, but it is an advanced feature for an induction
This Cp is for the blades only and doesn’t include the
turbine and certainly out of the realm of possibilities for
other losses such as gearbox losses, electricity used to
the vast majority of homebuilders.
operate the wind turbine, electrical resistance losses,
and other inefficiencies. These losses are assumed to
be similar for either type of blade. A further discussion of the effects on output of wind
turbine configuration changes is warranted to further
understand the effects of the changes between the 2
Changing from the Breezy blades to the twisted, tapered
different blades.
blade gives a projected increase from 12000KWH/ year
x 1.19 = 14280 KWh/year. But since the Cp’s are so
different at the higher wind speed, the new blades could If the wind blows constantly at low speed, then a high
capture a significant amount of power at higher wind peak power output in high winds will not be productive
speeds. since it’s rarely seen. That turbine’s peak capability
would rarely be used and the significant cost increase in
generator capacity would be underutilized.
This appears to validate the benefit of using a twisted
tapered blade, however it doesn’t necessarily do that.
An increase in RPM will give an increase in power output The opposite is true if the site has plenty of very windy
as shown in figure 8. This peak happens at a higher days. That extra generator capacity can capture a
wind speed though and so to compare blades at one low significant portion of the output for the year in these
wind speed gives a deceptively low number. This is a peak scenarios.
Figure 9.1 & 9.2 show the power output and Cp curves
for the 2 different blades. The new blades show a peak
and a drop off as the wind speed increases. The Breezy
5.5 turbine power output was described in [1] to rise
fairly linearly and level off to 5.5 KW at 23 mph. This
analysis shows an unexpected peak at 30 mph and so it
doesn’t correlate very well to the observations and
measurements in [1]. But the analysis of both show the
power rising to a peak and falling as the airflow stalls
over the airfoil and stall regulation takes over. This
doesn’t mean the authors of [1] are wrong. Just that the
analysis here can’t include all the factors in a simple
analysis of a real wind turbine.

The Cp also rises to a peak and drops off dramatically.


This is the whole point of stall regulation because this is
exactly what is needed to limit the power input from the
blades due to the tremendous power in the wind at high
wind speeds. Figure 10: A classic Cp vs tip speed ratio graph for
different types of turbine.
To calculate the power output using the mean annual
power density, the Cp of a turbine is used. It must be an In Figure 10 each curve rises to a peak and then falls as
average Cp over the expected normal range of power the tip speed ratio increases. This shows that a fast
output. rotation speed in a slow wind (high tip speed ratio) gives
a lower Cp due to drag. And also a low Cp occurs for a
low rpm rotor in high wind speeds (low tip speed ratio),
which gives low Cp due to stall. Additionally, high
rotational speeds produce more noise and stress on the
blades and hub due to high centrifugal forces and
gyroscopic forces. There is an optimal tip speed ratio for
each rotor configuration and rotational speed.

The solidity of a rotor, which is the ratio of the blades


plan area to the total swept area of the rotor, shown in
Figure 11, has an effect on the operating characteristics
of the turbine. Using more blades isn’t necessarily
better. Higher solidity gives you slower speeds, higher
torque, and less power. While lower solidity gives you
higher speeds, less torque, and more power.

Figure 9.1: Power output vs wind speed for Breezy and Solidity also changes the characteristics of the efficiency
for the new blades. curves as shown in Figure 12. The more the blades, the
better low tip speed performance

Figure 11: Front view of a wind turbine rotor showing the


area a of a single blade in the total swept area of the
Figure 9.2: Cp vs. wind speed for Breezy and for the blades.
new blades.
The twist angle in the root area is commonly adjusted
also. If the twist angle is increased it helps in low wind
speeds when the turbine is staring up.

For every conceivable variable there is an associated


graph of the effect on the power output or the efficiency.
Solidity σ: The ratio of blade area to the total swept To do a complete job in wind turbine design, each
area. variable must be changed and the effect plotted to
identify the optimal design. The BEM method can be
used to do that in a simple spreadsheet, however it is
time consuming and tedious and is the reason why
computer programs are written to speed the process and
that task is not undertaken in this paper.

3. Determine the benefits and viability of including the


tail furling design found in [2].

One method of limiting power during high winds is


turning the rotor at an angle to the wind as seen in
figure 13. With small turbines using a tail for directional
control, this can be accomplished with tail furling.
Furling is when the dynamics of the system respond to
the excess wind by turning the tail to the side in
proportion to the excess wind speed. As the tail turns
the tail still points parallel to the wind and the rotor turns
Figure 12: the effects of changing solidity on a Cp vs tip at an angle to the wind. While it’s called tail furling, the
speed ratio plot. [4] effect is a rotor that turns at an angle to the wind. This
reduces the power input by reducing the effective area,
Note that solidity is a factor in determining a and a’ in and by changing the angle of attack to a lower angle on
step 7 of the BEM method. the blades at the top of the rotor and to a steeper angle
at the bottom.
The twisted and tapered blades in this paper were given
the optimum twist angle from [5] using the following
equations.

The optimal angle of attack α is chosen based on the lift Figure 13: Tail Furling
and drag curves and Φ is computed and used in the
BEM method. Another method of controlling the max power input is
stall regulation. The following quote sheds some light on
The chord length c is calculated with the following this method: “Stall regulation provides the simplest
formula means of controlling the maximum power generated by a
turbine to suit the sizes of the installed generator and
gearbox and until recently, at the time of writing, is the
most commonly adopted control method.” [4]

Stall regulation is mechanically simple due to having no


Where x is the local tip speed ratio at r instead of R for moving parts to limit the power input. The blades are at
the usual tip speed ratio. a fixed angle to the hub. Stall regulation is normally
used on a constant rotational speed generator like an
The optimal chord value is nearly 1/3 of the length of the induction generator. Tail furling is typically used on a
blade. This is impractical to build and the chord is turbine with a permanent magnet generator because that
usually trimmed linearly from a practical value and generator does not limit the rpm and the airfoil can’t stall.
blended into the rest of the blade instead of following the The rpm would increase until something came apart.
optimal formula.
With stall regulation the wind speed increases, and the
tangential velocity remains the same. The angle of
attack increases and the airfoil gradually stalls and Centrifugal force of blade on rotor = 2.6 lbs (formula
decreases the Cp as shown in figures 14 & 15. The below)
blade design and generator must be analyzed as a
system at all wind speeds to make sure that the power
output vs. wind speed curve will provide the correct
balance between optimal extraction of power while
limiting peak output.
Gyroscopic forces (assume 60 degrees/10 seconds from
the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
61400-1 load case 1.3) = 138 ft lbs (formula below)

Where Ω is the, Λ is the yaw rate, and cos Ψ is 1 and –1


Figure 14: increasing wind speed decreases tip speed to give max bending at the top and bottom position of
ratio λ. the blades.

Gust Loads thrust on rotor (50 year extreme wind from


IEC 61400-1 load case 1.6) = 656 lbs per blade and
2622 lbs total. Cd of 1.3 for a flat plate is used in the
standard drag formula below.

The IEC standard defines the Mean Annual Wind Speed


as an input to determine the 50 year extreme wind.
Figure 16 shows this map from
www.kcc.state.ks.us/maps/ and 6.5 m/s is found at the
target site. The 50 year extreme wind is 1.4 times the
annual extreme wind, which is 5 times the mean annual
wind speed. This is 102 mph for this site.

Root moment on each blade from 50 year extreme wind


Figure 15: Cp vs tip speed ratio λ showing the significant loads; M = 999 ft lbs. The formula below is the standard
impact to Cp of decreasing λ during stall regulation. [4] formula for determining the moment from a cantilevered
beam with distributed load w.

While tail furling is effective and useful on some wind


turbines, stall regulation is a better option on an
induction generator wind turbine and an analysis of the
need for tail furling is therefore concluded in this report.

4. Determine the forces acting on wind turbine system


and analyze the stresses on selected components.

From the BEM method calculation spreadsheet the


loads on the Breezy blades at the rated output of 5.5 Kw
at 23 mph are:

Blades force on tower = 264 lbs

Torque of rotor = 409 ft lbs

Blade root bending moment (per blade) = 449 ft lbs


Figure 16: Mean Annual Wind Speed at 30 Meters

These loads will be combined and used to analyze the


operating conditions of selected components. Due to
the complexity of some of the structure, the FEA
workbench in CATIA was used to analyze the structure.

a. Tower and yaw bearing assembly.

Under normal operating loads with gyroscopic


forces, the stress level in the tower is quite low at
only about 5 ksi as shown in figures 17 & 18. Under
gust loads the stress increases to 10 ksi. The Figure 18: Tower close-up under operational and
higher stress shown in the color scale correspond to gyroscopic loads. Tower stress ~5 ksi
stresses in the cables, which isn’t analyzed here.

Figure 17: FEA of tower under operational and


gyroscopic loads. Figure 19: Tower close-up under gust loads. Tower
stress ~ 10ksi.

b. Rotor hub

The rotor hub is a complex weldment and benefits


greatly from FEA.
The stress in the hub reaches >10ksi at certain
locations during normal steady state operation.
Assuming mild steel with Ftu = 30ksi, and a fatigue
limit of 1/3 Ftu, there could be fatigue cracking at
certain highly loaded locations.

Figure 20: rotor under operating loads.

Figure 22: Close-up of hub with operating loads and


gyroscopic forces. Max stress ~12.6 ksi.

Figure 21: rotor under operating loads with


gyroscopic forces.

In figure 21 the rotor has gyroscopic forces applied,


which bend the top blade one way and the bottom
blade the other way. They result from yawing of the
turbine while the rotor is spinning. The forces can
be significant for a fast yaw rate. The yaw rate of 60
degree/10 seconds in the IEC standard is noted at
being the minimum. Further investigation or testing Figure 23: hub with substantial gyroscopic forces
is needed to see if that is a suitable number. Prior causing high stresses. Max stress 32 ksi.
to finding the IEC standard, this author initially
assumed a higher yaw rate of 90 degrees/second
was a suitable number for a tail pointed turbine.
The high gyroscopic forces were high enough to
yield the driveshaft and hub and prompted further
investigation into a suitable yaw rate.

The cyclic gyroscopic forces exemplify that fatigue is


a driving factor in the design of wind turbines. In
addition, each blade undergoes a load reversal from
gravity at each revolution. The wind itself is cyclical
with gust here and there driving various cyclical
loads in all components.

Figure 24: Blades with 50 year extreme wind.


Stress ~ 31 ksi.
Figure 25: Hub with 50 year extreme wind. Stress ~ Figure 28: Driveshaft with gyroscopic forces from 90
31 ksi deg per sec yaw rate. Stresses ~ 46 ksi.

c. Drive shaft The high stresses resulting from an assumed load case
indicates the need to determine the actual yaw rate seen
in service on a small wind turbine. It also underscores
the importance of appropriate radii on the driveshaft
where the diameter changes so as to reduce stress
concentrations.

d. Tail boom

The tail force is assumed to come from a 10m/s side


gust on a flat plate. This only produced a force of 26 lbs
and stresses of 6ksi. While this isn’t much, it showed
the weak spot in the structure. Also included is a
downward force of 50 lbs to account for the mass of the
tail structure.

Figure 26: drive shaft with normal operating forces.


Stress ~ 1 ksi.

Figure 27: Driveshaft with normal operating forces and


gyroscopic forces. Stress ~ 1.5 ksi Figure 29: Tail under side load, stress ~ 6 ksi.
Figure 32: yaw structure under operating and gyroscopic
loads. Stress ~ < 3ksi.

Figure 30: Tail structure close-up showing 6 ksi under The stresses in this structure under operating and
light load. gyroscopic loads is quite low at 3 ksi. The deflection is
about .020”. What isn’t shown is the nacelle cover that’s
The high stresses in figure 30 occur on the aft standing made of 16 gage sheet metal (.060 thick). It is fastened
leg of an angle iron support in bending. A quick fix for along the sides of the bedplate to the upstanding leg of
this is to use a square channel section. This will add angle iron. It’s also fastened along the entire front and
stiffness as well as reducing the peak loads in that back creating a tension and shear member. The
piece. This isn’t necessary depending on the confidence inclusion of such a substantial stiffening member can
that this analysis represents the maximum load on the only be assumed to make the stresses and deflections
part. irrelevant.

CONCLUSION

The coefficient of performance of Breezy 5.5 output was


found to be .20 at 23 mph.

The size of blades was determined to be 23.9 ft, or the


same size but with a Cp of .28 in order to achieve the
17,000 kwh/year goal.

The blades of Breezy 5.5 were analyzed and compared


to a twisted tapered design of the same diameter but at
an increased rpm. The efficiency increase coupled with
an rpm increase caused their output to be predicted at
the target 14280 kwh/year. This is short of the goal at
face value. A further investigation of the complete
Figure 31: Tail without side support. Stress ~ 4.5 ksi power curve combined with the probability distribution at
various wind speeds will determine if their performance
is suitable for this stall regulated design.
The high stress above caused me to investigate whether
this angle was even needed and figure 31 shows the
stresses without it. While this reduced the stress to 4.5 The tail furling concept was abandoned in light of the
ksi, the deflection doubled and further treatment is investigation into stall regulation. Stall regulation is well
needed to investigate weather vibrations are a problem suited to induction generators and is therefore the
due to the structure being less stiff. preferred choice over tail furling which is more suited to
permanent magnet generator equipped wind turbines.
e. Structure connecting low speed driveshaft
bearings to yaw bearing. Loads on the blades were determined for the operating
loads, gyroscopic loads during yaw, and for the 50 year
extreme wind. Some structural details of the Breezy 5.5
This is another complicated structure that benefits from
were analyzed and the peak stresses identified. Some
FEA. The bedplate provides a mounting base for the
peak loads were found to be excessive and this may
generator and the driveshaft bearings so that they
lead the builder to modify certain details to avoid high
remain properly aligned to each other.
stresses.
REFERENCES DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS

1. Timothy McCall and Alan Plunkett, Breezy 5.5, a: axial induction factor (AKA, slowdown factor)
Derby KS, Prairie Turbines, LLC, 2005
2. Dan Bartman & Dan Fink, Homebrew Wind Power, a’: radial induction factor
Masonville, CO, Buckville Publications LLC, 2009.
3. Gary L. Johnson, Wind Energy Systems, Electronic A: area of rotor
Edition, 2001.
4. Tony Burton, David Sharpe, Nick Jenkins, & Ervin ρ: density of air
Bossanyi, Wind Energy Handbook, England, John
Wiley & Sons, 2001. z: height above the ground
5. Martin O. L. Hansen, Aerodynamics of Wind
Turbines, 2nd Edition, Sterling, VA, 2008. u: power density

CONTACT V: wind speed

Steven Kreibach is a design engineer at Spirit V0: far upstream wind speed
Aerosystems. He has a BS in mechanical engineering
from the University of Kansas (1995) and is working on a Vrel: apparent wind speed in rotating airfoil frame of
master’s degree in aerospace structures at Wichita State reference
University. He lives at 11000 E 39th St. S, Derby KS
67037 (where he intends to build a wind turbine) and can Φ: angle between apparent wind and the rotor plane
be reached at skreibach@yahoo.com, or 316-686-1611.
α: angle of attack of airfoil relative to Vrel

θ: angle of airfoil to rotor plane

ω: angular velocity of rotor

λ: tip speed ratio

x: local tip speed ratio

D: diameter of rotor

Cp: coefficient of performance

σ: rotor solidity

Re: Reynolds number

μ: kinematic viscosity

BEM: Blade Element Momentum

F: Prandtl tip loss factor

B: number of blades on rotor

β: angle of airfoil at the tip of the blade

Cl: Coefficient of lift of airfoil

Cd: coefficient of drag of airfoil

Cn: coefficient of lift normal to rotor

Ct: coefficient of drag tangential to rotor

Pt: tangential force on individual blade segment


Ai: slope of linear Pt equation FEA: Finite Element Analysis

Bi: point intersect of linear Pt equation OEM: original equipment manufacturer

M: moment NACA: National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics

R: blade radius

r: radial distance of calculation APPENDIX

Kw: Kilowatt, unit of rate of energy use BLADE CALCULATIONS.XLS


KWh: Kilowatt hour, unit of energy

Anda mungkin juga menyukai