IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v17y2024i9p2189-d1387976.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Study on Load Assessment Methods for Offshore Wind Turbines Using a Simplified Method and OpenFAST Simulations

Author

Listed:
  • Satish Jawalageri

    (Structural Dynamics and Assessment Laboratory, School of Civil Engineering, University College Dublin, D04 V1W8 Dublin, Ireland
    Gavin and Doherty Geosolutions, D14 X627 Dublin, Ireland)

  • Subhamoy Bhattacharya

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)

  • Soroosh Jalilvand

    (Gavin and Doherty Geosolutions, D14 X627 Dublin, Ireland)

  • Abdollah Malekjafarian

    (Structural Dynamics and Assessment Laboratory, School of Civil Engineering, University College Dublin, D04 V1W8 Dublin, Ireland)

Abstract

Simplified methods are often used for load estimations during the initial design of the foundations of offshore wind turbines (OWTs). However, the reliability of simplified methods for designing different OWTs needs to be studied. This paper provides a comparative study to evaluate the reliability of simplified approaches. The foundation loads are calculated for OWTs at the mudline level using a simplified approach and OpenFAST simulations and compared. Three OWTs, NREL 5 MW, DTU 10 MW, and IEA 15 MW, are used as reference models. An Extreme Turbulence Model wind load at a rated wind speed, combined with a 50-year Extreme Wave Height (EWH) and Extreme Operating Gust (EOG) wind load and a 1-year maximum wave height are used as the load combinations in this study. In addition, the extreme loads are calculated using both approaches for various metocean data from five different wind farms. Further, the pile penetration lengths calculated using the mudline loads via two methods are compared. The results show that the simplified method provides conservative results for the estimated loads compared to the OpenFAST results, where the extent of conservativism is studied. For example, the bending moment and shear force at the mudline using the simplified approach are 23% to 69% and 32% to 53% higher compared to the OpenFAST results, respectively. In addition, the results show that the simplified approach can be effectively used during the initial phases of monopile foundation design by using factors such as 1.5 and 2 for the shear force and bending moment, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Satish Jawalageri & Subhamoy Bhattacharya & Soroosh Jalilvand & Abdollah Malekjafarian, 2024. "A Comparative Study on Load Assessment Methods for Offshore Wind Turbines Using a Simplified Method and OpenFAST Simulations," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-19, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:9:p:2189-:d:1387976
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/9/2189/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/17/9/2189/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. He, Kunpeng & Ye, Jianhong, 2023. "Dynamics of offshore wind turbine-seabed foundation under hydrodynamic and aerodynamic loads: A coupled numerical way," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 453-469.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. He, Kunpeng & Ye, Jianhong, 2023. "Seismic dynamics of offshore wind turbine-seabed foundation: Insights from a numerical study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 200-221.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:9:p:2189-:d:1387976. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.