WTG Dynamics in Soft & Stiff Towers Beyond 160m Hub Height

Transcription

1 WTG Dynamics in Soft & Stiff Towers Beyond 16m Hub Height BREMEN 9th August, 17 CRISTINA GARCÍA PÉREZ ION AROCENA DE LA RÚA

2 CONTENTS 1. Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Company Introduction Nabralift Description 1 st Commercial Product Nabralift vs Market Challenges. Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Analysis Introduction Results for Critical Loadcases Results Summary Summary of Results and Conclusions

3 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Company Introduction NABRAWIND TECHNOLOGIES Advanced Wind Technologies Drastic Cost Reduction Modularity Proven Technologies Modular Blade Joint Self Erected Tower 3

4 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Company Introduction Scope of Activities Design Adaptation Turnkey Delivery Specific MBJ/SET Design Blade Design Adaptation MBJ/SET Components Manufacturing WTG Load Analysis WTG Self Erection WTG Variant Certification 4

5 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Product Description Tower Transition Lattice Modules Foundation 5

6 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Product Description 6

7 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Tower Assembly and WTG Self Erection Conventional WTG Large Cranes Nabralift Small Cranes for WTG Assy Nabralift Self-Erection Boom 75-16T Cranes 7-8 Boom 5-6T Cranes Nabralift Self Erection System 7

8 3 NABRALIFT Product Description 8

9 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Tower Maintenance Maintenance Free Tower Segments Tower Components Bolted Connections O&M Crane Blade Tip Repair Platform 9

10 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Certification & Prototypes Status 1 st Commercial Product 16m Hub Height 15-14m Diameter MW Range Design Loads Design Certificate Component Certificate Design Manufacturing Assy Full Scale Test 1 st Wind Farms 1

11 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower XL Market Challenges Cost Increase HH14 =1.6 HH1 Most Expensive Component HH>1 -/5% +/3m -4/5% 11

12 1 Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower XL Market Challenges Cost Increase HH14 =1.6 HH1 Most Expensive Component HH>1 Logistics Roads / Bridges Limiting Concepts Installation XL Cranes Driving Installation Cost Expensive Mobilization and Rental Operation Large Correctives OPEX Increase WTG Integration Control Challenges in Towers Unfeasible for XL Steel Towers unfeasible or extra-stiffened low noise? specific control 1

13 CONTENTS 1. Nabralift Self-Erecting Tower Company Introduction Nabralift Description 1 st Commercial Product Nabralift vs Market Challenges. Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Analysis Introduction Results for Critical Loadcases Results Summary Summary of Results and Conclusions 13

14 Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Analysis Introduction Tower Models Hub Height 16m 16m Technology Monotubular Nabralift 1 st Mode Freq Hz Tower Top Defl. (1MN) m Tower Mass 6 45 T 14

15 Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Analysis Introduction Tower Models 1P 3P Minimum Speed Nominal Speed 1st Mode 1st Mode.6 Campbell Diagram.5 Frequency [Hz] Rotor Speed [rpm] 15

16 Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Analysis Introduction - Loadcases Case A: 1. Power Production Case B:.4 Power Production + Fault Case C: 6.4 Idling >4 loadcases fatigue > loadcases ultimate 16

17 Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Results Wind X-Deflection Wind X-Deflection Bending Moment - My z z Bending Moment - My y x y x 17

18 Results X-Deflection Turbulent Wind Speed Case A 1. Power Production Hub wind speed magnitude [m/s] Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Wind X-Deflection Wind Bending Moment - My Bending Moment - My Time [s] Bending Tower Bottom 11 Maximum Static Bending Tower Bottom ULS % 1 8 My [MNm] My [MNm] Time [s] Tower Tower Top 3 Fatigue Equivalent Bending Tower Bottom FLS.5 +9% My [MNm] X-Deflection [m] Time [s]

19 Results Hub wind speed magnitude [m/s] Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Case B.4 Power Production plus Occurrence of Fault X-Deflection Turbulent Wind Speed Wind X-Deflection Wind Bending Moment - My Bending Moment - My 4 Time [s] Bending Tower Bottom Maximum Static Bending Tower Bottom ULS % My [MNm] My [MNm] Time [s] Tower Tower Top 3 Fatigue Equivalent Bending Tower Bottom FLS % My [MNm] X-Deflection [m] Time [s] 19

20 Results Hub wind speed magnitude [m/s] Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Case C 6.4 Idling X-Deflection Turbulent Wind Speed Wind X-Deflection Wind Bending Moment - My Bending Moment - My Time [s] Bending Tower Bottom 6 Maximum Static Bending Tower Bottom ULS % 5 3 My [MNm] My [MNm] Time [s] Tower Tower Top 1 Fatigue Equivalent Bending Tower Bottom FLS,8 5,6 4,4 %, My [MNm] X-Deflection [m] 3 -, 1 Time [s]

21 Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Global Results My [MNm] Maximum Static Bending Tower Bottom ULS +1% 6 5 Fatigue Equivalent Bending Tower Bottom FLS +% My [MNm]

22 Soft vs Stiff XXL Tower Dynamics Summary of Results and Conclusions Summary of Results and Conclusions An IEC-Compliant Load Analysis has been completed for: A wind turbine of 3.5MW with a 16m tall soft-soft tower, a rotor diameter of 13m and a overall nacelle weight of T. A wind turbine of 3.5MW with a 16m tall soft-stiff tower, a rotor diameter of 13m and a overall nacelle weight of T. Tower flexibility increases static and fatigue loads: Moderate increase in WTG Operation Significant increase in Shut Down loadcases (critical for soft-soft towers)

23 Thanks for your Attention