Abstract

Advancements in wind turbine technology are critical for the global renewable energy landscape. The continuous growth of wind turbine capacities has presented various challenges for flow and power control strategies. New smart systems are mandatory to monitor and control loads and power effectively to guarantee optimal operation in current wind generation systems. While several methods have been proposed, experimental validation remains challenging due to operation costs, size, and time required to fabricate a fully scaled wind turbine prototype. Concerning this, the implementation of reduced-scaled wind turbine test benches offers an alternative to validate new flow control strategies for optimizing the efficiency of wind turbines. This paper presents the design and implementation of a wind turbine test bench for active flow control systems in small-scale wind turbines. The system includes a multidegree mounting system, a dynamic torque sensor, a permanent magnet generator, a pitch control system, and a configurable hub for different wind rotor designs. The design includes a finite element method (FEM) analysis to evaluate the different configurations of the proposed system. As a result, the implementation of the complete functional structure, dynamic sensors, and complementary elements is presented. Finally, an approach to the scaling methodology is revealed based on the mathematical criteria of similarity conditions between a lab-scale wind turbine model and a reference prototype, providing useful information on scaling techniques for wind turbines.

Introduction

Understanding and simulating the wind energy conversion process for individual wind turbines and wind farms requires the ability to model multiple complex physical processes interacting at various spatial and temporal scales. Effective design of wind energy systems fundamentally relies on a solid understanding of physics and the accuracy of the mathematical models used in simulations [1]. After the development and modeling phases, testing and certification procedures are required to ensure the correct operation of the wind turbines. Test bench systems offer a controlled solution to achieve these requirements. These systems provide experimental reproducibility, advanced measurement capabilities, and adjustable operating conditions, integrating a comprehensive and detailed characterization of wind turbine performance. Various studies have presented advances in developing test benches to analyze the phenomena and variables involved in wind energy systems, such as the case of Averous et al. [2], who presented the development of a full-size 4 MW wind turbine tested following a multiphysics-in-the-loop power hardware concept. Milich et al. [3] presented the mathematical analysis of a wind turbine with NACA 4412 profile where various stages were developed, such as the development of a theoretical aerodynamic analysis through the design of the wind turbine model, the structural verification of the blades, the theoretical calculation of the torque, and an experimental evaluation of the generating device. This research contains the necessary elements of a functional aerodynamic model that allows physical construction validated by theory. Klein et al. [4] conducted a study about the relevance of different numerical and experimental methods to reproduce measurement models of wind turbines in wind tunnels, including a high blocking ratio. Also, Botasso et al. [1] presented an analysis of a wind tunnel at Milan Polytechnic, enabling experimental studies in aerodynamics, aeroelasticity, and control.

Reduced-scale models have emerged as a practical alternative for performing tests in controlled environments, offering significant benefits when full-scale testing is cost-prohibitive or logistically challenging. However, there are several difficulties and challenges to face when implementing reduced-scale models of wind turbines. The reduction in the models can modify critical aerodynamic parameters, such as Reynolds and Mach numbers, which affects the accuracy of the test results and makes it challenging to replicate the behavior on a full-scale wind turbine. These downscale models operate at lower Reynolds numbers than full-scale prototypes, resulting in changes in flow characteristics that affect the validity of the data when extrapolated to full-scale systems [5]. Another challenge that small-scale models face is the variability of response that may require different materials or structural redesigns to accurately mimic the stresses and deformations of the full-scale prototype [68]. Recent studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of tailored optimization algorithms in compensating for scaling effects and enhancing data reliability in reduced-scale testing; Li et al. [9] revealed a novel methodology with an optimization algorithm for designing a scale laboratory model to study the wake in a 2.5 MW turbine, thereby validating the possibility of obtaining scale models with a range of 1:300. Likewise, Canet et al. [6] formulated laws for the scaling of wind turbines, the work focused on designing a smaller model that mimics a full-scale machine. As a result, it was observed that with suitable options, models subjected to experimental testing with high scaling values can provide reasonably accurate performance results. Finally, Giahi and Jafarian Dehkordi [10] presented a study of the influence of dimensional scaling on simulation results through computational fluid dynamics tools, obtaining results entirely proportional to those obtained in the theory of aerodynamic similarities. With the growing interest in offshore wind turbines, numerous studies have focused on validating scale models to investigate the application of scaling laws and ensure model-prototype aerodynamic similarity. These studies have provided valuable comparative analyses with simulation results, enabling a deeper understanding of offshore turbine systems. Applying scaling laws has proven essential in addressing unique challenges posed by offshore environments, such as variable wind patterns and sea conditions [11,12].

Although power control is essential for all wind turbines, load alleviation and control have been established as the main challenge for large wind turbines. With the increase of wind turbine’s rotor diameter, the blades and their aerodynamic loads also increase, which demands either new blade materials or the implementation of fast response load relief mechanisms [13]. Various authors have studied these active control systems in recent years; however, in most cases, they have faced the obstacle of experimental validation in larger turbines due to the costs and accessibility of these turbines in wind farms [1419].

As a solution to this problem, this paper presents the design and implementation of an experimental test bench to study active flow control in small-scale wind turbines. The design methodological proposal is presented based on maximum critical requirements: test rotor size, blockage ratio, thrust force, and wind tunnel velocity. This section includes a finite element method (FEM) analysis to evaluate different configurations. As a result, the design and implementation of the general functional structure, dynamic sensors, and complementary elements are revealed. Finally, a scaling methodological proposal for the test bench is discussed. This approach is based on a 500-kW turbine prototype scaled to a laboratory turbine model of 0.9 m diameter, which achieves the maximum rotor diameter that will be tested in the test bench presented in this work, according to the maximum range of blockage ratio < =0.4 which allows the adequate correction of the performance parameters of wind turbines (CP, CT) through the mathematical models explored in the literature [2023].

The main contributions are summarized below:

  • A novel test bench design based on maximum critical requirements: test rotor size, lock ratio, thrust force, and wind tunnel speed.

  • A comprehensive design methodology incorporating FEM analysis to evaluate different configurations that ensure a robust structure, functionality, and versatility of the test bench.

  • A scaling methodology approach based on a review of the critical parameters that must be analyzed to carry out the reduced scaling of wind turbines for wind tunnel testing.

Materials and Methods

Figure 1 shows the outline of the test bench design methodology with which the various stages were established according to the design methodology described in Ref. [24].

Fig. 1
Design methodology diagram
Fig. 1
Design methodology diagram
Close modal

The case study of this paper is limited to integrating the test bench system in the wind tunnel of the National School of Higher Studies Juriquilla of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) (Fig. 2). The main characteristics of the tunnel are a maximum wind velocity of 25 m/s and an area in the test section of 1.6 m2.

Fig. 2
Wind tunnel (ENES Juriquilla, UNAM Mexico)
Fig. 2
Wind tunnel (ENES Juriquilla, UNAM Mexico)
Close modal

Mathematical Models.

The model of one-dimensional theory and Betz’s law were applied to establish the axial force T as a design variable for the definition of the technical requirements of the test bench. One-dimensional theory examines a simple one-dimensional model for an ideal rotor. The rotor in this model is considered an actuator disk. This disk reduces the wind speed from V0 upstream of the rotor, through u in the rotor plane, to u1 in the wake. This behavior can be seen in Fig. 3 [24].

Fig. 3
Actuator disk theory [18]
Fig. 3
Actuator disk theory [18]
Close modal
According to this theory, and following the assumptions of an actuator disk, Eq. (1) describes the thrust force T in the axial direction of the rotor, inducing a decrease in speed behind the turbine
(1)

where A is the rotor area, and Δp is the pressure difference in the rotor section.

There are four relevant positions: way in front of the turbine (V0), immediately in front of the turbine (u), equal to immediately after the turbine (u), and way after the turbine (u1). The wind turbine power P could be expressed in terms of the flow velocities through the four relevant positions in Eq. (2), applying the principle of conservation of mass and Bernoulli’s equation (Fig. 3)
(2)

where ρ is the air density.

The axial induction factor a represents the degree to which the speed at the rotor inlet decreases behind the turbine, and the relationship with the velocities before and after the disk is defined in the following equations [24]:
(3)
(4)
As stated by the principle of mass and momentum conservation and Bernoulli’s equation, it is possible to derive Eqs. (5) and (6) [24] to define the thrust coefficient CT and the power coefficient CP in terms of the axial induction factor for the turbine as
(5)
(6)

The maximum Cp = 16/27 = 0.59 occurs when the value of the axial induction factor a = 1/3.

Similarity Theory.

The aerodynamic theory of similarity indicates that to find similarity between model-prototype of wind turbines, the conditions of geometry, kinematic, and dynamic similarity must be met [9].

Geometric similarity: Geometric similarity conditions such as diameter, tower height, and chord, among others, are met. The geometric scale relationship λL is defined as
(7)

where D is the diameter of the rotor, and the subscripts denote m for the model and p for the prototype.

Kinetic similarity: To meet the kinematic similarity condition defined as λV, the tip speed ratio (TSR) of the model blade and the prototype must be consistent, that is
(8)

Dynamic similarity: According to Gasch and Twele [25], if the nondimensional curves of CP, CT, and moment coefficient CM are similar, the flux conditions in a wind turbine must be the same.

Therefore, the scaling methodology used for the test bench proposed in this work will seek to achieve similar performances concerning their dimensionless dynamic numbers while maintaining geometric and kinematic similarity. The test bench aims to test novel active control systems, so it is crucial to achieve a high level of dynamic similarity that allows measuring variations in (CP) and main loads and moments (CT and CM).

Results and Discussion

Maximum Axial Force.

According to Eq. (4), it is possible to obtain the output wind velocity for a maximum CP wind turbine case; in this work, this parameter was considered as a design criterion because it is intended that the tests performed on the test bench be run under optimal operating conditions and with optimal wind turbine designs when the axial induction factor increases up to 0.5 where maximum CT occurs, the wind turbine is not operating in optimal condition; therefore, the variable u1 is calculated with a = 1/3 as the value of the optimum axial induction factor and V0 = 25 m/s as the maximum wind velocity that can be exerted in the wind tunnel
With Eqs. (1) and (2), the thrust force in terms of the velocities through the control volume could be calculated by Eq. (9)
(9)
Replacing the variables for the case study and applying them to Eq. (9), the maximum thrust force T exerted by the wind speed of 25 m/s is obtained

Technical Requirements and Conceptual Design.

Table 1 shows the specifications and technical requirements of the system. The data in the table were derived from the operational parameters of the wind tunnel where the test bench is implemented and the functional characteristics integrated by the system. The instrumentation and data acquisition system is based on a National Instruments CompactDAQ-9178 device with I/O analog and digital modules (Fig. 4). The CompactDAQ system has a timing resolution of 12.4 ns, and the main parameters and characteristics of each module are described in Table 2.

Fig. 4
Data acquisition system
Fig. 4
Data acquisition system
Close modal
Table 1

Test bench technical specifications

Wind speed range0–25 m/s
Yaw angle range0–45 deg
Rotational speed range0–5000 rpm
Torque measurement0–100 N·m
Maximum rotor diameter1 m
PMSG generator600 W and 3 kW
Variable pitchActive control
Wind speed range0–25 m/s
Yaw angle range0–45 deg
Rotational speed range0–5000 rpm
Torque measurement0–100 N·m
Maximum rotor diameter1 m
PMSG generator600 W and 3 kW
Variable pitchActive control
Table 2

Data acquisition technical specifications

ModuleNo. channelsI/ORangeResolutionSample rateAccuracy (% of range-offset error)Test bench application
NI 920532Input±10 V16 bits250 kS/s0.002Analog input sensor devices (current, voltage, wind velocity, pressure, etc.)
NI 92634Output±10 V16 bits0.1Filters, control systems, and active blade control devices.
NI 92038Input±20 mA16 bits200 kS/s0.02Current input signal (4–20 mA, anemometers, etc.)
NI 940332I/OTTLControl devices, digital signals and communication, RPM measurement, etc.
NI 94824OutputSwitch voltage (60 VDC, 250 Vrms)Emergency stop, A/C relay control, and wind turbine autobrake system.
NI 92174Input−200 °C to 850 °C24 bits2.5 ms/channel0.15–0.2 °CRTD temperature sensors.
NI 92152Input±10 V16 bits100 kS/s0.014Differential analog input sensor devices (control inputs, temperature, differential transducers, etc.)
ModuleNo. channelsI/ORangeResolutionSample rateAccuracy (% of range-offset error)Test bench application
NI 920532Input±10 V16 bits250 kS/s0.002Analog input sensor devices (current, voltage, wind velocity, pressure, etc.)
NI 92634Output±10 V16 bits0.1Filters, control systems, and active blade control devices.
NI 92038Input±20 mA16 bits200 kS/s0.02Current input signal (4–20 mA, anemometers, etc.)
NI 940332I/OTTLControl devices, digital signals and communication, RPM measurement, etc.
NI 94824OutputSwitch voltage (60 VDC, 250 Vrms)Emergency stop, A/C relay control, and wind turbine autobrake system.
NI 92174Input−200 °C to 850 °C24 bits2.5 ms/channel0.15–0.2 °CRTD temperature sensors.
NI 92152Input±10 V16 bits100 kS/s0.014Differential analog input sensor devices (control inputs, temperature, differential transducers, etc.)

The capabilities of the instrumentation and control system of the test bench integrate control and measurement devices for critical variables for wind turbines. The acquisition system incorporates high-precision torque, rotor speed, wind speed, and pressure measurements. Moreover, the system outputs control signals for pitch, flap, and brake control actuators. Finally, the test bench requires flexibility to adapt to several experiments. The modular architecture of NI CompactDAQ makes the test bench instrumentation and control system scalable and adaptable.

A DECENT DYN-200 dynamic torque sensor was integrated for torque and power measurements, allowing synchronous RPM and dynamic torque measurement. Additionally, BMP180 barometric pressure and temperature sensors were integrated.

In order to achieve the technical requirements expressed in Table 1, a first design was developed, which integrates a base with a degree-of-freedom for yaw positioning, a tower at the average height of the test section of the wind tunnel, a nacelle base for the installation of the main shaft, two bearings, measuring instruments, and electric generator (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5
Conceptual design

Finite Element Method Analysis.

Design iterations were based on the von Mises safety factor criterion to obtain the final design. The objective parameter of this optimization methodology was the reduction of material and, consequently, cost. The FEM simulations were carried out with solidworks simulation with the selection of the AISI 304 material, and the elements for the analysis were restricted to the use of the two bearings where the radial and axial forces are concentrated.

Boundary conditions: A fixed geometry was applied to the underside of the tower base (Fig. 6). The thrust force T was applied in the test bench’s main shaft, and two forces of 5 kg were applied to the torque sensor and the generator position to simulate the weight of each element (Fig. 7).

Fig. 6
Fixed geometry in static simulation
Fig. 6
Fixed geometry in static simulation
Close modal
Fig. 7
Forces applied in static simulation
Fig. 7
Forces applied in static simulation
Close modal

Figure 8 shows the three design iterations that were analyzed with a static FEM analysis. The modifications from designs (a) to (c) mainly reduced structural elements and material thickness to obtain a lighter prototype.

Fig. 8
Comparative analysis of factor of safety for the three design iterations
Fig. 8
Comparative analysis of factor of safety for the three design iterations
Close modal

Table 3 shows the static simulation results for the three design iterations, where the first variable to compare is the maximum stress (Pa), maximum displacement (mm), and minimum factor of safety (von Mises) presented under the same boundary conditions; it is possible to observe that design (b) obtained better performance for stress and a smaller displacement; however, the weight is higher to design (a) and (c). The maximum displacement of 2 mm appears on the tilt angle and is a reasonable value, considering the operating conditions of the wind turbine. This displacement is achieved only under the maximum operating wind velocity of the wind tunnel, an infrequent but critical scenario for the system’s safety. In these cases, the wind turbine is designed to automatically activate the breaking system to reduce structural loads and prevent possible damage to components.

Table 3

Design iterations comparative results

Figure 8 Maximum stress (Pa)Maximum displacement (mm)Minimum safety factorWeight (kg)
(a)1.84×10+70.621125.7
(b)9.41×10+60.412231.7
(c)4.2 7×10+71.984.824.9
Figure 8 Maximum stress (Pa)Maximum displacement (mm)Minimum safety factorWeight (kg)
(a)1.84×10+70.621125.7
(b)9.41×10+60.412231.7
(c)4.2 7×10+71.984.824.9

The primary consideration for selecting the final design was the weight and simplicity of the manufacturing process since elements for structural support at the base of the nacelle were removed. This resulted in a lower manufacturing cost, a safety factor of 4.8, and a lower weight than the two design iterations (a) and (b).

Hub and Pitch Mechanism.

The test bench hub was designed with a flexible flange system to exchange three-blade rotors, and the hub also integrates a pitch angle control mechanism. The pitch system in small-scale wind turbines plays a vital role in controlling the angle of the rotor blades to maximize energy capture and prevent mechanical damage in extreme wind conditions. The design process was based on aerodynamic principles, mechanical engineering, and integration with control systems.

Figure 9 shows the pitch angle system configuration. This design incorporates a steel bevel gear system mechanism where the gear ratio is 1:2 (20–40 T). The bevel gear system was coupled to a servomotor MG996 with a torque capacity of 9.4 kgf·cm, a movement range of 0–180 deg, and a response time of 0.17 s/60 deg controlled by pulse width modulation. Furthermore, the hub integrates a manual pitch setting mechanism in order to compare different responses in static and dynamic tests on the test bench.

Fig. 9
Hub and pitch system
Fig. 9
Hub and pitch system
Close modal

Final Design and Prototype.

The test bench was manufactured and assembled with its components and instrument devices. The main structure was manufactured with AISI 304 stainless steel, and the hub rotor was made of ONIX 3D filament, which is nylon reinforced with carbon microfibers. In addition, the blades were manufactured using three-dimensional (3D) printing PLA material and were subjected to a surface treatment with polyurethane coating (Fig. 10). The PLA material was selected based on the fact that in previous studies, it has been presented as an excellent solution for the micro wind energy applications due to its low deformation values, and it has also demonstrated less stress and strain during axial loading [26].

Fig. 10
Blades and hub assembly
Fig. 10
Blades and hub assembly
Close modal

Figure 11 shows the CAD model of the final design and the test bench setup integrated into the wind tunnel, indicating the location of its main components.

Fig. 11
(a) Final design model and (b) test bench prototype
Fig. 11
(a) Final design model and (b) test bench prototype
Close modal

Similarity Scaling Approach.

According to the geometric, kinetic, and dynamic similarity conditions above, the conversion relationship that each physical quantity should satisfy for the model turbine can be deduced as follows in Table 4. The mathematical deduction of the parameters shown in the table was presented in Ref. [25].

Table 4

Conversion relationships

ParametersField-scaleScale factorLab-scale
Rated powerλV3λL2
Blades number1
DiameterλL
Hub heightλL
Rated wind speed1
Rated RPMλL1λV
TSR1
Rated thrust forceλL2λV2
ParametersField-scaleScale factorLab-scale
Rated powerλV3λL2
Blades number1
DiameterλL
Hub heightλL
Rated wind speed1
Rated RPMλL1λV
TSR1
Rated thrust forceλL2λV2

The comparison of a theoretical prototype wind turbine of 0.5 MW and a lab-scale model with a geometric scale factor of 1:45 was applied using the conditions of the Similarity Theory above. The scale conversion parameters below in Table 5 were implemented to perform the BEM simulations using the open-source software qblade [27]. qblade software performs an optimized unsteady polar-BEM [28], and the BEM parameters are shown in Table 6.

Table 5

Conversion relationships of the lab-scale wind turbine

ParametersPrototypeLab-scale modelUnits
Power500,000253W
Blade N33
Diameter400.9m
Hub height250.56m
TSR77
RPM371631rpm
Wind speed1111m/s
Tangential speed7777m/s
Strouhal0.010.01
Thrust force69,00035N
Reynolds3,732,944149,155
Scale
Geometric1:45
Kinematic1
DynamicCT and CP
ParametersPrototypeLab-scale modelUnits
Power500,000253W
Blade N33
Diameter400.9m
Hub height250.56m
TSR77
RPM371631rpm
Wind speed1111m/s
Tangential speed7777m/s
Strouhal0.010.01
Thrust force69,00035N
Reynolds3,732,944149,155
Scale
Geometric1:45
Kinematic1
DynamicCT and CP

Note: Bold values show the Reynolds number comparison.

Table 6

BEM simulation parameters

VariablesValue
Wind speed11 m/s
Collective pitch0 deg
Density1 kg/m3
Kinematic viscosity1.6 × 10−5 m2/s
Blade elements discretized50
Max. epsilon convergence1 × 10−3
Max. number of iterations100
Relax factor0.1
Corrections
DTU PolyBEM
Prandtl tip loss
3D correction
VariablesValue
Wind speed11 m/s
Collective pitch0 deg
Density1 kg/m3
Kinematic viscosity1.6 × 10−5 m2/s
Blade elements discretized50
Max. epsilon convergence1 × 10−3
Max. number of iterations100
Relax factor0.1
Corrections
DTU PolyBEM
Prandtl tip loss
3D correction

Figures 1214 present the results of the steady BEM analysis of the power, thrust, and moment coefficients versus TSR, where the rotor blade corresponding to the prototype wind turbine is the line with the triangle marker, and the one corresponding to the model wind turbine is the line with the hexagram marker. As can be seen, the behavior of both coefficients is not sufficiently similar. As shown in Table 5, the Reynolds number difference between both is significant; there is no dynamic similarity anymore. As a proposal, this approach required an optimization process in future work, which would require considering the use of enhancing low Reynolds airfoils and a geometric variation of the twist angle and chord.

Fig. 12
BEM simulation of power coefficient CP
Fig. 12
BEM simulation of power coefficient CP
Close modal
Fig. 13
BEM simulation of thrust coefficient CT
Fig. 13
BEM simulation of thrust coefficient CT
Close modal
Fig. 14
BEM simulation of torque coefficient CM
Fig. 14
BEM simulation of torque coefficient CM
Close modal

Conclusion

The technological development and innovation of wind turbines have allowed their energy contribution to be on the rise. Test benches are presented as an essential key tool for the experimental analysis of wind turbines at the laboratory level. This paper presents the methodology for designing a small-scale wind turbine test bench and its implementation in the ENES Juriquilla UNAM, Mexico wind tunnel. As a result, a comparative analysis of the design iterations based on FEM simulations was developed. The test bench was designed and manufactured for a maximum wind speed of 25 m/s and a safety factor 4.8. The system can measure rotational speed, torque, pressure, temperature, voltage, and current variables. The system can measure rotational speed, torque, pressure, temperature, voltage, and current variables through a National Instruments CompactDAQ data acquisition system. In addition, this study revealed a configuration for active pitch control through servomotor and bevel gears. The final design features functional structures that allow a 45 deg yaw angle adjustment, and the nacelle base design integrates slots to install auxiliary components that will allow future studies, such as diffusers, to increase wind turbine performance.

Although wind tunnel tests could not fully replicate full-scale conditions or replace field tests, they are essential for validating and adjusting models and new active control systems, such as pitch, camber morphing, and flap. The selection of scale values in reduced models for wind tunnels is usually based on a combination of aerodynamic, structural, and flow similarity criteria that attempt to approximate the behavior of full-scale prototypes as closely as possible.

Theoretically, adjusting the static pressure in a wind tunnel could modify the flow density and thus achieve a higher Reynolds number. However, the tunnel infrastructure used in this study has limitations regarding the adjustable static pressure range, which limits direct correspondence with the Reynolds values of the prototype. The methodology suggested in this work is based on the studies analyzed, where it has been proven that adapting the geometric similarity can achieve similarity in the critical aerodynamic parameters. These investigations have demonstrated that, although the exact Reynolds number is not equal, the wind tunnel data of reduced models remain representative [112]. As future work, developing methods based on intelligent algorithms for assisted scaling for large wind turbine rotors is crucial.

2

Design and implementation of an experimental test bench for the study of active flow control systems in wind turbines at scale (a perspective towards the development of intelligent blades).

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico through PAPIIT TA100323 project2

Funding Data

  • PAPIIT TA100323 Project through Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico (Funder ID: 10.13039/501100006087).

Data Availability Statement

The authors attest that all data for this study are included in the paper.

Nomenclature

a =

axial induction factor

A =

rotor area, m2

CM =

momentum coefficient

CP =

power coefficient

CT =

thrust coefficient

Dm =

diameter of the model rotor, m

Dp =

diameter of the prototype rotor, m

p =

pressure, Pa

P =

power, W

T =

axial force, N

u =

wind velocity in the rotor plane, m/s

u1 =

wind velocity in the wake, m/s

V0 =

wind velocity upstream of the rotor, m/s

Greek Symbols
λL =

geometric scale relationship

λV =

velocity scale relationship

ρ =

air density, kg/m3

σ =

stress, Pa

Acronyms
BEM =

blade element momentum

CAD =

computer-aided design

PLA =

polylactic acid

PMSG =

permanent magnet synchronous generator

RPM =

revolutions per minute

RTD =

resistance temperature detector

TTL =

transistor-transistor logic

TSRm =

tip speed ratio of the model

TSRP =

tip speed ratio of the prototype

References

1.
Bottasso
,
C. L.
,
Campagnolo
,
F.
, and
Petrović
,
V.
,
2014
, “
Wind Tunnel Testing of Scaled Wind Turbine Models: Beyond Aerodynamics
,”
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn.
,
127
, pp.
11
28
.10.1016/j.jweia.2014.01.009
2.
Averous
,
N. R.
,
Stieneker
,
M.
,
Kock
,
S.
,
Andrei
,
C.
,
Helmedag
,
A.
,
De Doncker
,
R. W.
,
Hameyer
,
K.
,
Jacobs
,
G.
, and
Monti
,
A.
,
2017
, “
Development of a 4 MW Full-Size Wind-Turbine Test Bench
,”
IEEE J. Emerging Sel. Top. Power Electron.
,
5
(
2
), pp.
600
609
.10.1109/JESTPE.2017.2667399
3.
Milich
,
F. G.
,
Chuaire
,
M. N.
,
Álvarez y Álvarez
,
G. M.
,
Wittwer
,
A. R.
,
Veroli
,
C. G.
,
Basterra
,
J. L.
, and
Adotti
,
M. I.
,
2017
, “
Desarrollo de modelos a escala reducida para el análisis aerodinámico de aerogeneradores
,” Asociación Argentina de Energías Renovables y Ambiente, Corrientes, Argentina, accessed Dec. 5, 2023, http://repositorio.unne.edu.ar/xmlui/handle/123456789/27829
4.
Klein
,
A. C.
,
Bartholomay
,
S.
,
Marten
,
D.
,
Lutz
,
T.
,
Pechlivanoglou
,
G.
,
Nayeri
,
C. N.
,
Paschereit
,
C. O.
, and
Krämer
,
E.
,
2018
, “
About the Suitability of Different Numerical Methods to Reproduce Model Wind Turbine Measurements in a Wind Tunnel With a High Blockage Ratio
,”
Wind Energy Sci.
,
3
(
1
), pp.
439
460
.10.5194/wes-3-439-2018
5.
Bottasso
,
C. L.
, and
Campagnolo
,
F.
,
2021
, “
Wind Tunnel Testing of Wind Turbines and Farms
,”
Handbook of Wind Energy Aerodynamics
,
B.
Stoevesandt
,
G.
Schepers
,
P.
Fuglsang
, and
S.
Yuping
, eds.,
Springer International Publishing
,
Cham, Switzerland
, pp.
1
57
.
6.
Canet
,
H.
,
Bortolotti
,
P.
, and
Bottasso
,
C. L.
,
2021
, “
On the Scaling of Wind Turbine Rotors
,”
Wind Energy Sci.
,
6
(
3
), pp.
601
626
.10.5194/wes-6-601-2021
7.
Bianchini
,
A.
,
Bangga
,
G.
,
Baring-Gould
,
I.
,
Croce
,
A.
,
Cruz
,
J. I.
,
Damiani
,
R.
, and
Erfort
,
G.
, et al.,
2022
, “
Current Status and Grand Challenges for Small Wind Turbine Technology
,”
Wind Energy Sci.
,
7
(
5
), pp.
2003
2037
.10.5194/wes-7-2003-2022
8.
Wang
,
C.
,
Campagnolo
,
F.
,
Canet
,
H.
,
Barreiro
,
D. J.
, and
Bottasso
,
C. L.
,
2021
, “
How Realistic Are the Wakes of Scaled Wind Turbine Models?
,”
Wind Energy Sci.
,
6
(
3
), pp.
961
981
.10.5194/wes-6-961-2021
9.
Li
,
B.
,
Zhou
,
D. L.
,
Wang
,
Y.
,
Shuai
,
Y.
,
Liu
,
Q. Z.
, and
Cai
,
W. H.
,
2020
, “
The Design of a Small Lab-Scale Wind Turbine Model With High Performance Similarity to Its Utility-Scale Prototype
,”
Renewable Energy
,
149
, pp.
435
444
.10.1016/j.renene.2019.12.060
10.
Giahi
,
M. H.
, and
Jafarian Dehkordi
,
A.
,
2016
, “
Investigating the Influence of Dimensional Scaling on Aerodynamic Characteristics of Wind Turbine Using CFD Simulation
,”
Renewable Energy
,
97
, pp.
162
168
.10.1016/j.renene.2016.05.059
11.
Urbán
,
A. M.
, and
Guanche
,
R.
,
2019
, “
Wind Turbine Aerodynamics Scale-Modeling for Floating Offshore Wind Platform Testing
,”
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn.
,
186
, pp.
49
57
.10.1016/j.jweia.2018.12.021
12.
Vardaroglu
,
M.
,
Gao
,
Z.
,
Avossa
,
A. M.
, and
Ricciardelli
,
F.
,
2022
, “
Validation of a TLP Wind Turbine Numerical Model Against Model-Scale Tests Under Regular and Irregular Waves
,”
Ocean Eng.
,
256
, p.
111491
.10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.111491
13.
Maheri
,
A.
,
2014
, “
Simulation of Wind Turbines Utilising Smart Blades
,”
J. Therm. Eng.
,
2
(
1
), pp.
557
565
.10.18186/jte.01522
14.
Gupta
,
A.
,
Rotea
,
M. A.
,
Chetan
,
M.
,
Sakib
,
M. S.
, and
Griffith
,
D. T.
,
2021
, “
A Methodology for Robust Load Reduction in Wind Turbine Blades Using Flow Control Devices
,”
Energies
,
14
(
12
), p.
3500
.10.3390/en14123500
15.
McWilliam
,
M. K.
,
Barlas
,
T. K.
,
Madsen
,
H. A.
, and
Zahle
,
F.
,
2018
, “
Aero-Elastic Wind Turbine Design With Active Flaps for AEP Maximization
,”
Wind Energy Sci.
,
3
(
1
), pp.
231
241
.10.5194/wes-3-231-2018
16.
Qian
,
Y.
,
Zhang
,
Y.
,
Sun
,
Y.
, and
Wang
,
T.
,
2023
, “
Numerical Investigations of the Flow Control Effect on a Thick Wind Turbine Airfoil Using Deformable Trailing Edge Flaps
,”
Energy
,
265
, p.
126327
.10.1016/j.energy.2022.126327
17.
Alejandro Franco
,
J.
,
Carlos Jauregui
,
J.
, and
Toledano-Ayala
,
M.
,
2015
, “
Optimizing Wind Turbine Efficiency by Deformable Structures in Smart Blades
,”
ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol.
,
137
(
5
), p.
051206
.10.1115/1.4030445
18.
Alejandro Franco
,
J.
,
Carlos Jauregui
,
J.
,
Carbajal
,
A.
, and
Toledano-Ayala
,
M.
,
2017
, “
Shape Morphing Mechanism for Improving Wind Turbines Performance
,”
ASME J. Energy Resour. Technol.
,
139
(
5
), p.
051214
.10.1115/1.4036724
19.
Castillo
,
A. D.
,
Jauregui-Correa
,
J. C.
,
Herbert
,
F.
,
Castillo-Villar
,
K. K.
,
Franco
,
J. A.
,
Hernandez-Escobedo
,
Q.
,
Perea-Moreno
,
A.-J.
, and
Alcayde
,
A.
,
2021
, “
The Effect of a Flexible Blade for Load Alleviation in Wind Turbines
,”
Energies
,
14
(
16
), p.
4988
.10.3390/en14164988
20.
Jeong
,
H.
,
Lee
,
S.
, and
Kwon
,
S.-D.
,
2018
, “
Blockage Corrections for Wind Tunnel Tests Conducted on a Darrieus Wind Turbine
,”
J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn.
,
179
, pp.
229
239
.10.1016/j.jweia.2018.06.002
21.
Ross
,
H.
, and
Polagye
,
B.
,
2020
, “
An Experimental Assessment of Analytical Blockage Corrections for Turbines
,”
Renewable Energy
,
152
, pp.
1328
1341
.10.1016/j.renene.2020.01.135
22.
Zilic De Arcos
,
F.
,
Tampier
,
G.
, and
Vogel
,
C. R.
,
2020
, “
Numerical Analysis of Blockage Correction Methods for Tidal Turbines
,”
J. Ocean Eng. Mar. Energy
,
6
(
2
), pp.
183
197
.10.1007/s40722-020-00168-6
23.
Al-Obaidi
,
A. S. M.
, and
Madivaanan
,
G.
,
2022
, “
Investigation of the Blockage Correction to Improve the Accuracy of Taylor’s Low-Speed Wind Tunnel
,”
J. Phys.: Conf. Ser.
,
2222
(
1
), p.
012008
.10.1088/1742-6596/2222/1/012008
24.
Hansen
,
M. O. L.
,
2015
,
Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines
,
Routledge
,
New York
.
25.
Gasch
,
R.
, and
Twele
,
J.
, eds.,
2012
,
Wind Power Plants: Fundamentals, Design, Construction and Operation
,
Springer
,
Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany/Dordrecht, The Netherlands/London/New York
.
26.
Aljafari
,
B.
,
Samithas
,
D.
,
Balachandran
,
P. K.
,
Anandan
,
S.
, and
Babu
,
T. S.
,
2022
, “
Performance Analysis of PLA Material Based Micro-Turbines for Low Wind Speed Applications
,”
Polymers
,
14
(
19
), p.
4180
.10.3390/polym14194180
27.
Marten, D., Saverin, J., Behrens de Luna, R., and Perez-Becker, S., 2024, “
QBlade—Next Generation Wind Turbine Simulation
,” QBlade, Berlin, Germany, accessed Apr. 12, 2024, https://qblade.org/
28.
Madsen
,
H. A.
,
Larsen
,
T. J.
,
Pirrung
,
G. R.
,
Li
,
A.
, and
Zahle
,
F.
,
2020
, “
Implementation of the Blade Element Momentum Model on a Polar Grid and Its Aeroelastic Load Impact
,”
Wind Energy Sci.
,
5
(
1
), pp.
1
27
.10.5194/wes-5-1-2020