The global dynamic response of floating wind turbines is commonly simulated using aero‐hydro‐servo‐elastic tools that consider numerically generated wind files as input. Based on the guidelines given in existing standards, two methods of generating such wind files are typically used: the Mann uniform shear model and the Kaimal spectral and exponential coherence model. Both models consider the Kaimal spectrum with similar frequency characteristics: The main difference between the approaches is related to the spatial coherence. The present work examines the consequences of using the two different wind file generation methods for estimating the global responses of representative spar, semi‐submersible, and tension leg platform (TLP) 5 MW wind turbines. Predictions of the standard deviation of low‐frequency responses in operational conditions, including motions at the natural frequency in surge and pitch as well as quasi‐static (spar, TLP) and resonant (semi‐submersible) motions in yaw, are seen to differ up to 30% to 40% depending on the wind field model. The differences in motion responses have important consequences for the design of the mooring system components. Proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) techniques are used to qualitatively explain the differing spatial coherence of the wind field. Simulations including a limited number of POD modes in the wind field highlight the importance of the low‐frequency, energy‐rich modes, suggesting that this type of visualization can be a useful tool.

The wind turbine design standards advise choosing one of two recommended turbulence models for load simulations of offshore wind turbines. The difference in fatigue loads for the two turbulence models is relatively small for bottom-fixed wind turbines, but some floating wind turbines show a higher sensitivity to the chosen turbulence model. In this study, the motions and mooring line fatigue damage of two semi-submersible floating wind turbines are investigated for three different wind speeds: 8 m/s, 14 m/s and 20 m/s, and three different wave states for each wind speed. For both concepts, the CSC 5 MW and the CSC 10 MW, the low-frequency surge response is important for the mooring line tension, and the simulations using the Kaimal turbulence model give the largest variation in tension at the surge eigenfrequency. However, using the Mann turbulence model in the load simulations give a higher response in the range of the blade passing frequency (3P). The CSC 10 MW has a higher aerodynamic thrust relative to the CSC 5 MW, and will therefore have a larger surge response at the lower frequencies than the CSC 5 MW. At the lowest wind speed, where the variation in mooring line tension at surge eigenfrequency is high, the fatigue damage is larger if the Kaimal turbulence model is applied to the load simulations. However, at the highest wind speed, using the Mann turbulence model in the simulations, give a higher mooring line fatigue damage.

This article presents the Real-Time Hybrid Model (ReaTHM®) tests that were performed on a 10-MW semi-submersible floating wind turbine in the Ocean Basin at SINTEF Ocean in March 2018. The ReaTHM test method was used for the model tests to circumvent the limitations encountered when performing model tests with wind and waves. The physical model was subject to physical waves, while the rotor and tower loads were simulated in real-time and applied on the model by use of a cable-driven parallel robot. Recent advances in the ReaTHM test method allowed for extended testing possibilities and load application up to the 3p frequency and the first tower bending frequency.