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

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.

[1]  M. Drela.  XFOIL: An Analysis and Design System for Low Reynolds Number Airfoils , 1989 .

[2]  Torben J. Larsen,et al.  Active load reduction using individual pitch, based on local blade flow measurements , 2005 .

[3]  Ervin Bossanyi,et al.  Further load reductions with individual pitch control , 2005 .

[4]  Matthew A. Lackner,et al.  A comparison of smart rotor control approaches using trailing edge flaps and individual pitch control , 2009 .

[5]  Sridhar Kota,et al.  The Impact of Active Aerodynamic Load Control on Fatigue and Energy Capture at Low Wind Speed Sites. , 2009 .

[6]  J. Jonkman,et al.  Definition of a 5-MW Reference Wind Turbine for Offshore System Development , 2009 .

[7]  David G. Wilson,et al.  Combined Individual Pitch Control and Active Aerodynamic Load Controller Investigation for the 5MW UPWIND Turbine. , 2009 .

[8]  W.E. Leithead,et al.  A novel approach to structural load control using intelligent actuators , 2009, 2009 17th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation.

[9]  Christian Bak,et al.  Deformable trailing edge flaps for modern megawatt wind turbine controllers using strain gauge sensors , 2010 .

[10]  G.A.M. van Kuik,et al.  Review of state of the art in smart rotor control research for wind turbines , 2010 .

[11]  Scott J. Johnson,et al.  An overview of active load control techniques for wind turbines with an emphasis on microtabs , 2010 .

[12]  P. Weaver,et al.  A morphing trailing edge device for a wind turbine , 2012 .

[13]  G.A.M. van Kuik,et al.  Model predictive control for wind turbines with distributed active flaps: incorporating inflow signals and actuator constraints , 2012 .

[14]  Sandia Report,et al.  SMART Wind Turbine Rotor: Design and Field Test , 2014 .

[15]  Niels Kjølstad Poulsen,et al.  Full‐scale test of trailing edge flaps on a Vestas V27 wind turbine: active load reduction and system identification , 2014 .

[16]  Sandia Report,et al.  SMART wind turbine rotor. Data analysis and conclusions , 2014 .

[17]  Mike Graham,et al.  Fault ride-through for a smart rotor DQ-axis controlled wind turbine with a jammed trailing edge flap , 2014 .