Effect of erosion morphology on wind turbine production losses

Abstract

The impact of wind turbine (WT) blade erosion is still a major issue today because of the associated high maintenance costs and the loss of power production. The erosion process is influenced by many physical phenomena that still need to be understood better. Especially WT manufactures and owners need to know the potential impact of different levels of blade erosion on annual energy production (AEP). The damage produced by erosion modifies the aerofoil shape and therefore its aerodynamic properties, resulting in an AEP drop. In this study, the effect of various morphologies of erosion on AEP was obtained. First, a 3D characterisation of eroded blades using a laser scanner was performed. The erosion damages were grouped into two typologies: Typology 1 covers pits and gouges, and Typology 2 covers extended loss of top coat. Based on this, 2D section geometries were defined to evaluate the effect of erosion on the aerofoil aerodynamic 2D properties, which was done using the CFD code WMB. The aerofoil used as a reference was DU96W180. It was determined that the erosion damage alters the aerodynamic behaviour of the aerofoil by reducing the Cl max and the slope of the Cl- α curve, which resulted in a drop of the aerodynamic efficiency from 40% to 72%. These detrimental effects increased depending on the damage location (i.e., pressure side and closeness to the leading edge), damage size and shape (i.e., sharp transitions from the eroded to non-eroded surfaces). To evaluate the erosion effect on the AEP, the NREL 5 MW WT was selected. All its components were kept except the last 30% outer section of the 61.5 m blade whose NACA64_A17 aerofoil was replaced by a DU96W180. The erosion damages were modelled by extending the 2D eroded geometry along this outer section. The AEP was calculated using BLADED 4.5. It was concluded that erosion resulted in a decrease of the AEP, which can be up to 1% and 6% for damages of Typology 1 and 2, respectively. This study will help to standardize and estimate the effect of the type of erosion on AEP losses for different shapes and erosion typologies.

Determination of annual energy production loss due to erosion on wind turbine blades

“…Cylinder shapes 1 and 2, DU21-A17, DU25-A17, DU30-A17, DU35-A17, DU40-A17 and NACA 64-A17. In this study, the last third of the blade towards the tip is replaced with the DU96W180 airfoil, utilizing the erosion polars obtained from the previous 2D CFD study [20].…”

“…Three different erosion types are analyzed in this study. The erosion profiles are scanned and regenerated from real erosion imprints obtained from [20] scanning wind turbine blades after several years of operation. Figure 1 shows the erosion types which have the same shape but different sizes.…”

“…The polars of the clean and eroded cases obtained from CFD is used as an input to OpenFAST by replacing the last 3rd section of the blade by the DU airfoil for the clean case and three different eroded polars on this airfoil for the erosion cases. These polars are obtained by the previous 2-D CFD results from CENER [20]. All three erosion types and the clean blade are analyzed at velocities from 3 to 25 m/s for this study.…”

“…Another study on operational wind farms by quantification of energy losses associated with LEE shows an average AEP loss of 1.8 % for medium levels of erosion, and the worst affected turbine with an AEP loss of 4.9 % [7]. Recent experimental [17] and numerical [13] studies report AEP losses of about 4%, which might be increased up to 6% when related to loss of top coat on the leading edge [19].…”

“…Furthermore, surface irregularities due to roughness or erosion can cause early laminarturbulent boundary layer transition which affects the lift, drag, and stall characteristics. In recent years, there has been an increase in research focusing on the impact of leading edge erosion on aerodynamic performance deterioration [9,19,4,3,1,15,16,2] .This increased attention arises from the recognition that the associated power loss can be substantial.…”