A systems engineering analysis of three-point and four-point wind turbine drivetrain configurations

This study compares the impact of drivetrain configuration on the mass and capital cost of a series of wind turbines ranging from 1.5 MW to 5.0 MW power ratings for both land-based and offshore applications. The analysis is performed with a new physics-based drivetrain analysis and sizing tool, Drive Systems Engineering (DriveSE), which is part of the Wind-Plant Integrated System Design & Engineering Model. DriveSE uses physics-based relationships to size all major drivetrain components according to given rotor loads simulated based on International Electrotechnical Commission design load cases. The model's sensitivity to input loads that contain a high degree of variability was analyzed. Aeroelastic simulations are used to calculate the rotor forces and moments imposed on the drivetrain for each turbine design. DriveSE is then used to size all of the major drivetrain components for each turbine for both three-point and four-point configurations. The simulation results quantify the trade-offs in mass and component costs for the different configurations. On average, a 16.7% decrease in total nacelle mass can be achieved when using a three-point drivetrain configuration, resulting in a 3.5% reduction in turbine capital cost. This analysis is driven by extreme loads and does not consider fatigue. Thus, the effects of configuration choices on reliability and serviceability are not captured. However, a first order estimate of the sizing, dimensioning and costing of major drivetrain components are made which can be used in larger system studies which consider trade-offs between subsystems such as the rotor, drivetrain and tower. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

[2]  Yi Guo,et al.  Analytical Formulation for Sizing and Estimating the Dimensions and Weight of Wind Turbine Hub and Drivetrain Components , 2015 .

[3]  Jon Campbell,et al.  Improving Wind Turbine Drivetrain Reliability Using a Combined Experimental, Computational, and Analytical Approach , 2014 .

[4]  Yuri Bazilevs,et al.  Isogeometric fluid–structure interaction analysis with emphasis on non-matching discretizations, and with application to wind turbines , 2012 .

[5]  Jason Jonkman,et al.  Dynamics of offshore floating wind turbines—model development and verification , 2009 .

[6]  J. Michalakes,et al.  A numerical study of the effects of atmospheric and wake turbulence on wind turbine dynamics , 2012 .

[7]  Yi Guo,et al.  Effect of Tip-Speed Constraints on the Optimized Design of a Wind Turbine , 2014 .

[8]  W. LaCava,et al.  Gearbox Reliability Collaborative Project Report: Findings from Phase 1 and Phase 2 Testing , 2011 .

[9]  Brian Ray Resor,et al.  Definition of a 5MW/61.5m wind turbine blade reference model. , 2013 .

[10]  M. Hand,et al.  Wind Turbine Design Cost and Scaling Model , 2006 .

[11]  Jason Jonkman,et al.  Atmospheric and Wake Turbulence Impacts on Wind Turbine Fatigue Loading: Preprint , 2012 .

[12]  Lance Manuel,et al.  Large-eddy simulation of stable boundary layer turbulence and estimation of associated wind turbine loads , 2014 .