Energy 186 (2019) 115814

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Improving the efficiency of a Savonius wind turbine by designing a set

of deflector plates with a metamodel-based optimization approach
Bruno A. Storti a, b, Jonathan J. Dorella a, Nadia D. Roman a, c, Ignacio Peralta a, b,
Alejandro E. Albanesi a, b, *
a
n de M

Centro de Investigacio etodos Computacionales (CIMEC), UNL, CONICET, Predio “Dr. Alberto Cassano”, Colectora Ruta Nacional 168 s/n, 3000, Santa
Fe, Argentina
b
Laboratorio de Flujometría (FLOW), Facultad Regional Santa Fe (FRSF), Universidad Tecnolo
gica Nacional (UTN), Lavaise 610, 3000, Santa Fe, Argentina
c
n en M

Grupo de Investigacio etodos Num

gica Nacional (UTN), Lavaise
ericos en Ingeniería (GIMNI), Facultad Regional Santa Fe (FRSF), Universidad Tecnolo
610, 3000, Santa Fe, Argentina

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Savonius wind turbines are the most suitable devices used in urban areas to produce electrical power.
Received 11 March 2019 This is due to their simplicity, ease of maintenance, and acceptable power output with a low speed and
Received in revised form highly variable wind profile. However, their efficiency is low, and the development of optimization tools
10 July 2019
is necessary to increase the total power output. This work presents a metamodel-based method to
Accepted 22 July 2019
optimize the size and shape of a set of deflector plates to reduce the reverse moment of the turbine, using
Available online 25 July 2019
a genetic algorithm combined with an artificial neural network, reducing the computational cost. A
parametrization of the deflectors geometry is proposed, and a Computational Fluid Dynamics model was
Keywords:
Savonius wind turbine
implemented to train and validate the artificial neural network. The method was applied to design the
Optimization deflectors of an actual 8-blade, 1[kW], 2.5[m] height turbine. Results showed an efficiency increment of
Artificial neural networks 30%, from 0.215, to 0.279 in the turbine with the optimized deflectors. Furthermore, it is capable of
Genetic algorithm producing power at 4[m/s], while the reference design had null power at that point. This methodology
Deflectors plates demanded 159 h, a substantial reduction of the computational cost of up to 97% in contrast to the
Computational fluid dynamics classical simulation-based optimization approach.
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction grid, with a favorable payback.

Energy has become a vital element for the economic growth of
most countries. The rising concern about pollution caused by fossil
fuel and carbon emissions, and problems associated with climate
change, have led to the development and improvement of renew-
able energy sources. Wind energy is the fastest-growing renewable
source, and the World Energy Council Scenarios to the year 2050 [1]
predict it will continue its expansion in any of the given policy
scenarios. For instance, several countries such as United States [2],
United Kingdom [3], Germany [4] and Argentina [5] to name but a
few, have introduced policies and regulations that allow domestic
users to supply energy from renewable sources to the electrical
* Corresponding author. Centro de Investigacio
n de Me
todos Computacionales
(CIMEC), UNL, CONICET, Predio “Dr. Alberto Cassano”, Colectora Ruta Nacional 168
s/n, 3000, Santa Fe, Argentina.
E-mail address: aalbanesi@cimec.unl.edu.ar (A.E. Albanesi).
In this context, vertical axis wind turbines (VAWT) are the most
common devices used in urban areas to convert the kinetic energy
of the wind into electrical power, mainly due to the fact that vari-
ations in the wind direction (such as wind variations caused by
surrounding houses or buildings) do not affect the power generated
by the turbine [6,7]. In particular, the drag-driven Savonius VAWT
(S-VAWT) is a great candidate due to its high starting torque, low
cost, easy installation and maintenance, and robustness [6,8]. The
working principle of these VAWTs consists in the difference be-
tween the positive and negative torque generated by the blades.
Despite the aforementioned appealing characteristics, the effi-
ciency of the classical two-blade S-VAWT is approximately 15%
[6,7,9,10] and it is mandatory to raise it.
S-VAWTs can be improved via appropriate parametric modifi-
cations of the rotor geometry, or by using external deflectors to
shield the returning blades of the turbine, reducing the reverse
negative torque (also referred to as curtaining) [11,12]. Classical
experimental studies by means of wind tunnel testing can be found

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.07.144
0360-5442/© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814
in Refs. [13e20]. Alternatively, numerical techniques using
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) are sometimes preferred
given the possibility of testing many design candidates at lower
costs compared to experimental techniques, and they can be found
in Refs. [8,17,18,21e24].
Nevertheless, when the optimum design of a VAWT is sought,
simulation-based optimization becomes necessary because of the
large number of design variables involved, and requires the use of
an optimization algorithm to handle variables and a numerical
solver to compute the nonlinear response of the VAWT [25].
Simulation-based optimization of S-VAWTs can be found in the
pioneering works of Mohamed at al. [8,26], where Evolutionary
Algorithms inspired by “biological evolution” have been used to
design optimal rotors. Chan et al. [27] and Zhou et al. [28] used
Genetic Algorithms (GA) based in the nature principle of “survival
of the fittest” [25,29] due to their robustness and global searching
capability to find optimal blade shape in S-VAWTs. Tian et al. [30]
used Particle Swarm Optimization to determine the optimal
concave and convex shapes for Savonius blades. Antar and Elkhoury
[9] improved the performance of a VAWT by implementing a nu-
merical parametric optimization process of the shape and size of a
turbine case (rotor guide plates), based on the findings of El-Askary
et al. [31].
It is known that in nonlinear problems (particularly nonconvex
problems [32]), finding an optimal solution does not ensure that we
are in the presence of a global optimum [33e35]. A way to face
these kind of problems is the implementation of GA [36,37], that
are being used since some decades ago. For instance Ref. [8], relied
on the implementation of them for the optimization process of S-
VAWTs due to its robustness: they obtained a solution avoiding
local optimum values.
In processes that require several function evaluations (such as
optimization with GA), the computational cost could be signifi-
cantly high if the problem is large and presents a complex
nonlinearity. Namely, if the function evaluation is done through
computational simulations like CFD, and these simulations are
highly time-consuming, the whole optimization task becomes
unfeasible. In this context the necessity of developing a model that
assure the feasibility of the optimization process is crucial. In
Ref. [38], Barton and Meckesheimer expounded the metamodel-
based simulation optimization technique, being a metamodel a
“model of the model”. These surrogates models need to satisfy two
main properties: be “cheap-to-compute” and achieve a high quality
when being developed from a limited sample size. Several meta-
modeling techniques have advanced in the last years, such as Spline
Method, Gaussian Kriging Models, Bayesian Models, Polynomial
Regression and Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs).
ANNs are inspired in the human brain, specifically in how it
processes the information through the net of neurons that are part
of the nervous system. As defined by Haykin [39], an ANN is “a
massively parallel distributed processor made up of simple pro-
cessing units that has a natural propensity for storing experiential
knowledge and making it available for use”. They are similar to the
brain in two aspects: they acquire knowledge from its environment
through a learning process, and the interneuron connections
strengths (synaptic weights) are used to store this acquired
knowledge.
Under these circumstances, models based on ANNs are getting
increasing attention since they are capable of mapping non-linear
relationships between a large number of inputs and outputs,
solving non-linear problems with very low computational time
[40,41]. With the correct number of sampling points, ANNs are able
to reproduce the aerodynamic response of a S-VAWT in less time
compared to numerical simulations. Given their speed and
robustness, ANNs are becoming frequently used in the design and
optimization of energy systems [42e44]. In the field of S-VAWTs,
Sargolzaei and Kianifar [45] predicted the power factor and torque
of the rotor using ANNs trained by wind tunnel testing data, in
which the Tip Speed Ratio (TSR) was the main input of the network.
Debnath and Das [46] used ANNs to predict the power and torque
coefficient of a three-bucket VAWT. The blade overlap ratio, the
TSR, and the angular velocity of the turbine were the selected input
variables. Eight different networks were tested, and training was
performed experimentally with wind tunnel testing data. Biswas
et al. [47] trained ANNs to determine the torque and power coef-
ficient (CP ) of Savonius and Darrieus VATWs. A small set of exper-
imental results was used to train the networks, and a hit and trial
method was used to determine the number of hidden layers (HLs).
Wind speed, TSR and rotation speed of the turbine (u) were the
input design variables. Recently, Mohammadi et al. [48] addressed
the optimization of Savonius rotors by combining GA and ANNs to
compute the aerodynamic response of the turbine. CFD results
were used to train the ANN. Input design variables include
geometrical dimensions, such as rotor aspect ratio and blade
overlap, and aerodynamic information such as Reynolds number
and TSR.
The aim and novelty of this work is to present a metamodel-
based method to optimize the size and shape of a set of deflector
plates to reduce the reverse moment of the turbine, using GA
combined with an ANN in order to reduce the computational cost of
the optimization procedure. This allows the improvement of the
efficiency of an existing 8-blade, 1[kW], 2.5[m] height, S-VAWT
prototype by reducing the reverse moment of the returning blades.
The ANNs were developed to compute the CP of the turbine for a
given deflector geometry, replacing numerical models that demand
a higher computational cost. To this end, a parametrization of the
deflectors is proposed, which is implemented to obtain a repre-
sentative sample of all the possible configurations. CFD simulations
are performed in order to generate the samples needed to train and
validate the metamodel, in which wind information data used was
obtained by experimental measurements taken at the location site.
This S-VAWT prototype is currently being installed in the rooftop of
a 6 story, 25[m] height building.
2. Case study
This work deals with the optimal design of deflectors plates in
order to improve the performance of an actual 8-blade, 1[kW], 2.5
[m] height S-VAWT, fabricated to operate in the urban area of Santa
Fe city, Argentina (latitude 31[+]38[’]S, longitude 6[+]42[’]W, mean
altitude 25[m]a.s.l.), see Fig. 1. The installation site is the rooftop of a
6 story, 25[m] height building, shown in Fig. 2 (b). This building is in
an open area (there are no other tall constructions nearby) and it is
in front of the Setubal Lake that runs in the east side of the city, see
Fig. 2(a).
Prior to its design, experimental wind measurements were
made at the site with a cup anemometer manufactured by Davis
instruments, for a two year period. Registered wind speed ranges
from 0 to 26[m/s], with a mean average velocity of 5[m/s] (deter-
mined by the Weibull distribution). Remarkably, experimental
wind measurements revealed that the wind direction is predomi-
nant in the main four cardinal directions: north-south-east-west
(N-S-E-W), with almost negligible occurrence of diagonal wind.
The aerodynamic design of this turbine consisted in a three-
dimensional parametric study performed with CFD in order to
maximize the CP [21,22], defined as
 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814 3

Fig. 1. VAWT prototype. (a) The steel support, turbine, and instrumentation. (b) Power curve.

Fig. 2. (a) Satellite view of Santa Fe, with the Setubal Lake in the east. The round dot represents the location site of the VAWT. (b) Picture of the 6 story, 25[m] height building. (c)
Specific location site on the rooftop (notice the presence of the lake in the back).

of deflectors, that maximizes the output power of the VAWT, at an

P average wind velocity of 5[m/s].
CP ¼
rRhU 3
where P is the power generated by the turbine, r is the air density, R
and h are the radius and height of the turbine respectively, and U is
the velocity of the incoming wind [49]. The best configuration [21]
(see Fig. 3(a) and Table 1 for parametric and dimensions details)
consists in 8 semicircular blades with upper and lower plates, and
achieved a CP of 0.215 [21] with a TSR of 0.40 (it rotates at 20[RPM]
under a U of 5[m/s]). This was a considerable improvement over the
standard two-blade Savonius rotor coefficient CP ¼ 0.15 [6,9]. The
blades of the prototype are made of multiple plies of E-type
random-mat fiberglass and polyester resin, while the upper and
lower plates are made of a sandwich laminate that consists in E-
type random-mat and a foam core [22], see Fig. 3(b).
Since the wind is predominant in the main four cardinal di-
rections at the location site (see Fig. 2(c)), an additional improve-
ment to the power coefficient CP could easily be obtained by
installing four fixed deflectors around the turbine, at 90[+] from
each other, to curtain the returning convex blades and reduce the
reverse negative torque, see Fig. 4. Furthermore, with the appro-
priate design, these deflector plates could also be used as omnidi-
rectional guide-vanes with a Venturi-effect, a similar approach
followed by Chong et al. [50] for an urban VAWT. The objective of
this work can then be stated as finding the geometry of the best set
(1)
3. Methodology
The proposed methodology is depicted in Fig. 5, and covers the
complete process from the creation of the samples to the obtaining
of the optimal solution. The first step is to define the variables xi of
the problem that parametrize the deflectors geometry, as it is
stated in Section 3.1. The second step (box 1 in Fig. 5) consists of the
creation of the samples to train and validate the metamodel (blue
block “LHS”). To this aim, the Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) was
selected because it ensures an adequate representativeness of the
design domain of the variables, as it is explained in Section 3.2. Two
samples were obtained: one for the training (size xi ¼ 1 : 300) and
one for the validation (size xi ¼ 1 : 50) of the metamodels. Both
samples were simulated with CFD (see Section 3.3) to obtain the
corresponding outputs values for the two-dimensional CP (blue
blocks “CFD”).
Afterwards (box 2 in Fig. 5), different characteristics for the
ANNs were chosen, such as number of layers and neurons per layer
(Section 3.4). Once the several metamodels Fj ðxi Þ were trained
(green block “ANN”), the validation sample variables were evalu-
ated with them in order to compare the outputs obtained with the
CFD results, and select the metamodel FðxÞ that presented the best
performance, i.e. lowest mean square error (MSE) and/or maximum
4 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814

Fig. 3. Actual VAWT. (a) Schematic diagram, with dimensions listed in Table 1. (b) and (c) Image of the manufactured prototype, in which the semicircular blades and upper and
lower plates are clearly visible.

Table 1 3.1. Geometric parametrization of deflectors plates

Dimensions of the VAWT (in meters).

D d a e h Each deflector is characterized by three points using a third-

2.00 0.40 0.08 0.01
correlation factor R (green block “Validation Fj ðxi Þ”).
In the last stage (box 3 in Fig. 5), the optimization problem
(maximizing the CP ) was performed (pink block “GA”) by the
implementation of the GA described in Section 3.5, utilizing as
objective function the output of the best metamodel obtained in
the previous step. To validate the process, the optimal solution xopt
was simulated with CFD (pink block “CFD”) to obtain the CP of the
VAWT. If the error between the solution obtained with GAþANN
(C 2D 2D
Popt ) and CFD (C PCFD ) was smaller than a given tolerance (pink
block “Validation”), the process could be considered as finished; if
not, more ANNs should be trained, returning to box 2. In the
following Sections, all the steps showed in the flow chart in Fig. 5
are further detailed.
order spline interpolation. Each of them ði ¼ 1; 2; 3Þis determined
2.50
by polar coordinates ðri ; qi Þ, locating the origin in coincidence with
the axis of the VAWT (see Fig. 6). To avoid complex geometries that
do not represent a typical deflector design, the first point i ¼ 1 was
referenced to the origin, while the others i ¼ 2; 3 were related to
the previous point, as it is represented in Eq. (2).
r2 ¼ r1 þ Dr2 q2 ¼ q1 þ Dq2
(2)
r3 ¼ r2 þ Dr3 q3 ¼ q2 þ Dq3
The range of the parameters described in Eq. (2) are shown in
Table 2, and they take into account the available physical space left
in the VAWT emplacement site to locate the deflectors. Distances
are measured in centimeters and the angles in sexadecimal de-
grees, considering 1[cm] and 1[+] as the minimum units of mea-
sure. By this way, the resulting design space consists of 8:38  106
possible combinations of discrete variables. For this wind turbine,

Fig. 4. Because the wind is predominant in the main four cardinal directions, four fixed deflector plates around the turbine located at 90[+] from each other could improve its
performance. (a) Top view of the position of the deflector plates relative to the VAWT. (b) Scaled schematic of the VAWT and deflector plates compared to a 1.8[m] tall person.
 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814 5

Fig. 5. Flow chart of the proposed methodology. The first step (box 1) is the sampling and numerical simulation to feed the ANN, the second step (box 2) is the training and
validation of the ANN, and the third step (box 3) is the optimization process by combination of GAþANN.

Fig. 6. Parametrization of a single deflector plate.

Table 2 3.2. Sample variable generation

Range of the deflector parameters.

Variable Min Max In order to train the metamodel using a supervised learning
r1 [cm] 130 160
process, a representative sample composed by both inputs and
q1 ½  0 15 outputs is needed. McKay and Beckman [51] introduced the LHS,
Dr2 [cm] 5 30 which ensures that each input variable has all portions of its dis-
Dq2 ½  1 5 tribution represented by input values [52e54]. This technique
Dr3 [cm] 5 30 consists in dividing the range of each input variable into N intervals
Dq3 ½  1 5
to create a sample of size N. Afterwards, a value from each interval
is selected, matching them randomly, as it is shown in the example
of Fig. 7.
four identical deflectors are adopted, each of them aligned with a Following [55], different samples are created: one for training
cardinal direction. Therefore, only one deflector needs to be the metamodel (with size Ntr ¼ 300) and one for testing it (with
parametrized, and the six parameters defined before will act as size Nte ¼ 50). The variables for the implementation of the LHS are
design variables of the optimization problem proposed (see Section the parameters described in Eq. (2), which range and intervals are
3.5). exposed in Table 2.
6 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814
Fig. 7. Illustration of a LHS sample for 2-input variable problem and a sample size N ¼
5.
3.3. CFD model
Once the input variables are defined, the corresponding outputs
are obtained by CFD simulations using the open source software
Code_Saturne [56,57], which is based on the Finite Volume Method
[58e60], and it is used to solve the unsteady Reynolds Average
Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations. These equations were solved in a
segregated way, using the semi-implicit method for pressure-
linked equations consistent (SIMPLEC) algorithm for the coupling
between velocity and pressure [61]. A second-order linear upwind
(SOLU) method [62e64] is considered for the convective flux. The
Sliding-Mesh Model has been used for the stationary-rotating
subdomains coupling in the interface. A detailed description of
the equation discretization and implementation can be found in the
Code_Saturne: Theory guide [65].
The three primary approaches for turbulence modelization on
CFD computations are the RANS method, the Large Eddy Simulation
(LES), and the Hybrid RANS-LES method [66]. Despite LES-based
methods are more accurate, they are computationally expensive.
Hence, RANS methods were used in this work, which are still the
predominant CFD solver for the aerodynamics of VAWTs [67]. The
realizable k-ε RANS model [68] was used following the works of
Mohammed et al. [8,26], who have shown that it is appropriate for a
quantitative analysis on the performance of a S-VAWT. As blades
geometry does not change along the z-axis, a two-dimensional
model was employed to reduce the total computational cost
(neglecting tip effects), whereas for the final analysis to assess the
best solution, a complete three-dimensional CFD study using the
Shear Stress Transport (SST) k-u turbulence model [69,70] was
implemented (see Section 4.4). Several studies have shown that the
SST k-u model outperformed the k-ε models on fully three-
dimensional VAWT simulations [71e74].
The boundary conditions are prescribed wind velocity at the
inlet, free-slip in the lateral surface, and uniform atmospheric
pressure in the outlet, see Fig. 8. The blades surface is assumed to be
a smooth no-slip wall. The numerical model was validated against
published experimental and numerical measurements in Appendix
A.
The aerodynamic performance of the two-dimensional VAWT
model is assessed by computing the corresponding two-
dimensional power coefficient C 2D P defined as:
t2D ,u
C 2D
P ¼
rRhU 3
where t2D is the torque generated by the turbine in the two-
dimensional model. Due to the axial symmetry of the problem,
the wind velocity was considered aligned with only one cardinal
direction, with a magnitude of 5[m/s] in concordance with [21,22].
To determine the optimal u, a study was conducted to deter-
mine the variation of the C 2D P with respect to TSR, by using an inlet
wind velocity of 5[m/s], and sweeping through TSR values of 0.1,
0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, and 0.7. The results of this study are depicted in
Fig. 9, where it can be seen that the optimal TSR is 0.4.
The assumed average environmental conditions are tempera-
ture T ¼ 28[C], atmospheric pressure P ¼ 1:01325  105 [Pa],
constant density r ¼ 1:168[kg/m3], and kinematic viscosity n ¼
1:45  106 [m2/s]. Also, due to TSR ¼ 0.4, U is 5[m/s] and u is 20
[RPM]. The C 2D P without deflectors is 0.1451, and performance im-
provements during the optimization process will be measured
relative to this value.
Regarding the domain discretization, the Deflector Zone Mesh
(Stationary Domain A, Fig. 8) is the only domain remeshed in each
CFD simulation. The coupling between the Stationary Domains A
and B, and between the Stationary Domain A and the Rotating
Domain depicted in Fig. 8 is achieved by using the conforming
joining mesh algorithm implemented in Code_Saturne [65], where
new faces are created in the interfaces from the initial faces to be
joined. Mesh size is listed in Table 3, in which values for the mesh
corresponding to the deflector plates are an average of all cases.
This mesh configuration was obtained as the most suitable from the
mesh convergence analysis presented in Appendix B. . The two-
dimensional CFD finite volume mesh is depicted in Fig. 10.
An appropriate time step value has been chosen based on two
criteria: the CouranteFriedrichseLewy (CFL) condition, and a time
step increment dependency study. Large time steps leads to high
CFL numbers that may result in loss of accuracy or unphysical
values in the solution, while very little time steps imply a signifi-
cant increase in computation time. Therefore, a value of 0.001[s]
was chosen for all the CFD simulations, since it proved to be the
most suitable in the time step convergence study presented in
Appendix B.
3.4. Metamodel
ANNs are parallel computational models that consist in ar-
rangements of interconnected neurons (processing units), which
perform a process of learning in order to reach their objective (for
example, function approximation, filtering and pattern association
or recognition) [39]. In this work, several feedforward networks are
implemented to substitute the CFD simulations, as depicted in
Fig. 11. The architecture of these networks is arranged in several
layers of neurons placed one after another in order that the outputs
of one layer become the inputs of the following one. The Input Layer
contains the input variables of the problem (in this work the 6
parameters explained in Section 3.1) and the Output Layer the tar-
gets that the metamodel has to estimate (in this work the C 2D P ). The
HLs in between enable the network to extract higher-order
statistics.
As proposed by Haykin [39], the characterization of a neuron is
carried out by: inputs signals xi , a set of synaptic weights wki (that
measures the contribution of each input to the neuron), a bias bk
(that increases or lowers the input of the activation function), a
P
summing junction (which constitutes a linear combiner of the
weighted input signals), an activation function 4ð,Þ (that limits the
amplitude of the output of the neuron), and the output yk , as it is
seen in Fig. 12.
Fonseca et al. [75] propose a method for the development of an
(3)
ANN metamodel. It consists in deciding the number of HLs by trial
and error, training several architectures. Then, the number of
neurons is adjusted increasing one neuron at a time. For this work,
one to three HLs were used, each one with 6e20 neurons. The
 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814 7

Fig. 8. Size and boundary conditions of the two-dimensional CFD computational domain. The VAWT diameter is D ¼ 2[m].

Following the metamodels training, the one that has the best
performance over the Testing sample is selected, so as to obtain an
accurate approximation of the turbine efficiency, i.e., of the C 2D
P .

3.5. Optimization

As stated before, GA have proven their robustness in solving

nonlinear problems, and were also effectively used in the optimi-
zation process of S-VAWTs [27,28]. Moreover, they were success-
fully implemented in our previous works [55,77]) where an
optimization problem of integer type variables was solved, and
experience in the implementation of the algorithm was gained.
Based on the latter, GA are selected for solving the optimization
problem of the present communication. GA can be described as
search algorithms that replicate the principles of natural selection
and genetics proposed by Charles Darwin [78]. The notion of GA
was first introduced by Holland [79], who tried to explain the
Fig. 9. Variation of the C 2D
P with respect to TSR, computed with CFD. adaptive method of natural systems and design artificial systems
that mimic the important mechanisms of those natural systems
[80]. A modest genetic algorithm that leads to good results in some
Table 3
practical optimization problems is mainly composed of three op-
CFD mesh size and quality parameters.
erators: reproduction, crossover and mutation. Reproduction is a
Non- Skewness Number of cells process where the parameters of the optimization problem are
orthogonality
copied considering their objective function values. The objective
max average max hexahedron prism function could be seen as a measure of some profit, utility, and
Stator Mesh 41.70 10.07 0.37 266358 0 goodness that needs to be maximized, or in the case of the present
Deflector Zone Mesh 35.63 4.89 1.13 2300 119788 communication, the efficiency of the VAWT. In this copy, the pa-
Rotor Mesh 34.26 4.56 1.8 4323 39539 rameters with a higher value have a higher probability of providing
one or more offspring in the next generation. When a parameter is
chosen for reproduction, an exact replica of it is made, establishing
neurons were arranged so that the number of them is the same or a possible new population for the next genetic operation action.
less from one Layer to another, i.e., in a decreasing pyramid scheme. Then, crossover is an action where the newly reproduced param-
Table 4 summarizes the characteristics of the trained ANNs. The eters are mated at random. The techniques of reproduction and
Testing sample was used with the aim of choosing the ANN that crossover are incredibly simple, however, the combination of both
presented the best performance, and to avoid a possible overfitting, and the random nature of crossover, gives GA much of their
setting an early-stop criterion [39]: the training would stop if the robustness; a main advantage of these methods. Ultimately, mu-
performance over the Testing sample did not improve over 10 tation is a random modification of parameters values, and plays a
validations (see Appendix C). secondary role, since the frequency of mutation is very low.
Regarding the activation function implemented in the devel- Another advantage of the implementation of GA is that they can
opment of the metamodels, a trial and error methodology was be coupled with both CFD, to carry out a simulation-based opti-
used. The log-sigmoid function presented a better performance mization, or with a surrogate model, in a metamodel-based opti-
compared to other functions (hyperbolic tangent-sigmoid, linear, mization. In the proposed case study, each CFD simulation took
and saturating linear). For the ANN training, MATLAB [76] was used. about 27 min, leading to the infeasibility of performing a
8 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814

Fig. 10. Detailed view of the two-dimensional CFD domain, shown in real size relative to the VAWT in (a) and (b).

Fig. 11. Artificial Neural Network model implemented in this work.

Table 4
Architecture, configuration and parameters of the trained ANNs.

Type of ANN Multilayer feedfoward

Training data size 300

Validation data size 50
HL 1 to 3
Neurons per layer 6 to 20 in HL and 1 in Output Layer
Training function Levenberg-Marquardt backpropagation
Activation function Log-sigmoid for all the layers
Performance function MSE
Training stop criterion MSE ¼ 1  107
Maximum iterations 1500

Fig. 12. Model of a neuron.

 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814 9

simulation-based optimization because of its high computational

cost. For this reason, the development of the metamodel in Section
3.4 was crucial.
The implementation of GA adopted is based on the algorithm
proposed by Deep et al. [78], who introduced the Laplace crossover
[81] and the power mutation [82] techniques to improve the per-
formance of the GA solver, and was developed to efficiently solve
integer and mixed integer constrained optimization problems. In
the present communication, the aim of the optimization problem is
to maximize the CP of the VAWT by finding an optimal configura-
tion of the deflectors, which are characterized by the parameters
detailed in Table 2, and they are the design variables of the opti-
mization problem. Hence, the optimization problem is defined as:

min  f ðxÞ (4)

where f (the objective function) corresponds to the output of the Fig. 13. Flow chart of the optimization procedure combining GA and ANN.
metamodel (the C 2D
P ), and the vector x groups the design variables.
Briefly, the steps for the current GA optimization process are
4. Numerical results
summarized in the following pseudo-code implemented in previ-
ous works [77,83], where the main three steps of GA detailed before
4.1. ANN metamodel results
can be observed:

Each CFD simulation of the Training and Testing samples took

population ¼ random(popsize)
about 27 min, resulting in a total time of 6.6 days. These were
Fitness(population)
carried out in a 7[TFLOPS] cluster [85,86], using 120 cores. A total of
Update elite list
8150 metamodels were developed, demanding a training time of
From 1 to #generations do
83.97 min (over a desktop computer with a processor Intel(R) Core
offspring ¼ Selection(population)
i7-7700 3.60[GHz] and 32[GB] of RAM DDR4 2400[MHz]). The ANN
offspring ¼ Crossover(offspring)
model that presented the best performance has 15, 8 and 7 neurons
offspring ¼ Mutation(offspring)
in its HLs (see Fig. 14), a regression coefficient R of 0.98511 and
Fitness(offspring)
0.97338 for the Training and Testing samples (see Fig. 15), and a
Update elite list
MSE of 3:74  105 and 2:154  104 for the same samples,
population ¼ offspring
respectively. The training of this ANN stopped because of the early-
End
stop criterion.
The distribution of the error for the validation samples between
The settings of the GA depend on the characteristics of the
the CFD simulation and the ANN model output is represented in
optimization problem [84]. In this work, the configuration shown in
Fig. 16. The maximum absolute error is nearly 7:70  103, a clearly
Table 5 was adopted.
reasonable low value. Hence, we conclude that the metamodel
satisfactorily approximates the CFD model, with a substantial
reduction of the computational cost of each evaluation. This
3.5.1. Optimization procedure flowchart advantage will allow future optimization tasks, for example, the
Fig. 13 summarizes the optimization procedure. In each GA optimization of the deflector geometry, where it is mandatory that
generation loop, the offspring population is obtained through the the objective function to minimize (or maximize) could be rapidly
selection, crossover and mutation operation as explained before x evaluated.
in Fig. 13). During the fitness step, the C 2D
P is calculated for each
individual in the population using the metamodel. 4.2. GA optimization results
The output of the metamodel is fed to the GA optimizer for
evaluation, and for the proposal of a new set of design candidates of Following the procedure of Section 3.5.1, the optimized solution
the deflectors. This sequence is repeated until convergence. By this obtained with GAþANN was C 2D Popt ¼ 0.176, and corresponds to the
way, an optimized set of design variables is obtained, and the de- deflector configuration summarized in Table 6. Fig. 17 depicts the
flectors that maximize the CP are defined. convergence of the optimization procedure, where the x-axis rep-
resents the number of generations (see Table 5), and the y-axis the
fitness value in each generation. It can be noticed in Fig. 17 that the
Table 5
fitness values are negative, as we are minimizing f (see Eq. (4)).
GA algorithm settings to find the optimal deflector plates. The optimized configuration listed in Table 6 was simulated in
the two-dimensional CFD model to compare the simulation with
Parameter Value
the ANN result. The simulation gives a C 2D PCFD ¼ 0:179, showing a
Number of individuals 64 difference lower than 1.13% with respect to the metamodel result.
Number of generations 200
Furthermore, the performance increase represents a relative gain of
Elite individuals 5%
Selection Tournament 23.3% with respect to the reference,C 2D P , computed in CFD for the
Crossover method Laplace VAWT without deflectors (C 2D PCFD ¼ 0:1451, see Section 3.3).
Crossover probability 90% Fig. 18 (a) depicts the geometry of the optimized deflector in
Mutation method power
contrast with the geometries of the validation data samples, ar-
ranged into groups according to the value of the coefficient C 2DP . The
10 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814

Fig. 14. Configuration of the best ANNs metamodel.

Fig. 15. Regression plots. (a) for the training sample, (b) for the testing sample.

Fig. 16. Error distribution for the Testing Sample. Fig. 17. Convergence of the GA optimization precess.

Table 6 slight curvature of the optimized defectors can be attributed to the

Optimized deflector configuration obtained with low U used in the optimization process (5[m/s], see Section 3.3),
GAþANN, achieving C 2D
Popt ¼ 0.176. where physical phenomena such as flow detachment and vorticity
Design variable Value have a small effect.
The plots in Fig. 18(b) reveals that r1 is in the middle of the
r1 [cm] 148.3
q1 ½  15 allowable range, thus this is the best distance between the VAWT
Dr2 [cm] 30 and the deflectors. On the other hand, r3 is almost at the upper
Dq2 ½  4.7 value of the admissible range in an effort to maximize the
Dr3 [cm] 23 shrouding of the rotor, and this can also be inferred by the total
Dq3 ½  4.5
radial length of the optimum deflector which is 88.3% of the
 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814
Fig. 18. (a) Geometries of the deflectors from the validation sample, and for the optimized set of parameters. (b) Comparison of the optimum deflector, and the maximal and
minimal allowable design space.
allowable length. Finally, the exit angle q1 has taken the maximum
allowable value. From these observations, one may conclude that (i)
the deflectors shield the incoming concave blades and thus reduce
the reverse negative torque, and (ii) because of the exit angle q1 and
their slightly curved flat shape, deflectors are guiding the incoming
flow to the blades that generate the positive torque.
Fig. 19 depicts the pressure coefficient in the dimensionless
chord of the blade. The shrouding effect of the deflectors is clearly
observable in plots (g) and (h), for the positions 270[+] and 315[+],
respectively, thus diminishing the negative torque over these
returning blades. On the other hand, the guiding effect of the de-
flectors, plots (a), (b) and (c) for the rotor positions 0[+], 45[+] and
90[+], shows an improvement of the pressure coefficient over the
blades that generate the positive torque.
Fig. 20 shows the velocity magnitude field for several blade
positions, in which the continuity of the solution across the in-
terfaces between the three subdomains (stationary domains A and
B and the rotating domain shown in Fig. 8) can be observed. This
means that no additional errors or discontinuities are introduced in
the solution by the conforming joining approach. Hence, this
methodology allowed us to keep the same meshes for both the
rotor and the stationary domain B for all the simulation. Further-
more, from the comparison of Fig. 20, it can be observed that the
downstream flow velocities for the VAWT with deflectors are
smaller near the returning blades when compared to the VAWT
without deflectors. This shrouding effect leads to a great reduction
of the reverse moment produced by those blades. On the contrary,
higher velocities can be observed around the advancing blades
which eventually leads to an increase in the positive moment
generated by the turbine.
Fig. 21 shows the variation of the C 2D
P with respect to TSR, for the
VAWT with and without deflectors. It is interesting to note that the
optimal TSR is not affected by the presence of the deflectors, and
the optimal value is TSR ¼ 0.4.
4.3. Computational cost
As stated before, simulation-based optimization requires a high
computational time for several evaluations of the cost function. As
it is shown in Table 7 the approximately 12869 function evaluations
made by the GA for convergence would have demanded a total of
5788.8 h. It is worth noting that, if the CFD simulations were per-
formed in a desktop CPU, each of them would demand 817 min,
which would make all the optimization process impractical. In
contrast, the approach proposed in this work only needs 10 s for
11
completing this task. Also, if we add the necessary time for the
generation of the Training and Testing samples, and the building of
all the metamodels, the total time demanded was 158.90 h.
4.4. 3D CFD validation of the optimized solution
The optimization process performed in this work has been
carried out by the evaluation of the C 2D P (see Eq. (3)) in the two-
dimensional CFD domain shown in Fig. 8, and therefore it is not
comparable to the general three-dimensional CP of the VAWT
defined in Eq. (1). This is mainly due to the effect of the third
dimension [9], and by the presence of the upper and lower plates in
the three-dimensional rotor, which contribute to reduce the
vortices in the flow leaving the blades, and to maintain the pressure
inside the rotor [87], thus allowing to increase the torque generated
by the blades. Consequently, a final verification has been performed
in a three-dimensional domain to determine the real performance
improvement of the VAWT with the optimized deflectors,
compared to our previous simulations results [21,22]. The power
delivered by the rotor of the 3D-VAWT is measured in [W] and is
computed as:
Prot ¼ t,u (5)
where t is the torque generated by the blades measured in [Nm],
and u is in [rad/s]. The ratio of the power delivered by the rotor to
the power available in the wind for the same cross section 2Rh (see
Eq. (1)), results in the CP of the VAWT:
t,u
CP ¼ (6)
rRhU 3
The three-dimensional CFD simulations were also computed in
Code_Saturne, using the Sliding-Mesh Model. The SST k-u model
was used along a time step of 0.001[s]. The prescribed boundary
conditions were assumed equal to the two-dimensional model in
Section 3.3.
The length, width and height of the computational domain are
30D, 20D, and 10D respectively (where D ¼ 2[m] is the rotor
diameter), and the distance between the center of the turbine and
the inlet is 10D.The mesh was created using SALOME [88], and
comprises 20:919399  106 cells and 3:565386  106 nodes.
The optimal u was determined by measuring the variation of
the CP with respect to TSR, by using an inlet U of 5[m/s], and
sweeping through TSR values of 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, and
0.8. The results of this study are depicted in Fig. 22, where it can be
12 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814

Fig. 19. Pressure coefficient as a function of the dimensionless chord of the blade, for the turbine with and without the deflectors. Depicted for the angular position of the rotor: (a) 0
[+], (b) 45[+], (c) 90[+], (d) 135[+], (e) 180[+], (f) 225[+], (g) 270[+] and (h) 315[+].
 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814 13

Fig. 20. Velocity magnitude field for several blade positions at different physic time for the last revolution of the VAWT. The wind incoming speed is 5[m/s]. Without deflector (left)
and with deflector (right).

Table 7
Computational cost of simulation-based and metamodel-based optimization.

Description Metamodel-based Simulation-based

Sample CFD simulations 157.5 h e

Metamodels training 0.45 h e
GA evaluations of C 2D 10 s 5789 h
P
Total time 158.90 h 5798 h
Time saving 97.26% e

seen that the optimal TSR is also 0.4. Thus, the power output of the
VAWT with deflector plates was computed by sweeping through
wind velocities of 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13 and 15[m/s], and a u proportional
to TSR ¼ 0.4.
Table 8 summarizes the comparison of the results between the
VAWT with and without deflectors, showing an average power
improvement of 30%. Another interesting fact is that the VAWT
with deflectors is capable of producing power at 4[m/s], while the
Fig. 21. Variation of the C 2D
P with respect to TSR.
14 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814

Table 9
3D CFD validation of the optimized solution. Comparison of the
CP of the VAWT.

Average CP

VAWT (original) 0.215

VAWT þ deflectors 0.279
Improvement 30%

5. Conclusion

This work presented a new metamodel-based optimization

approach to determine the optimal shape of the deflector plates for
a drag-driven Savonius vertical axis wind turbine. The methodol-
ogy combines a genetic algorithm with an artificial neural network
model to compute the aerodynamic response of the turbine. Finally,
the method was applied to improve the performance of an actual 8-
blade, 2.5[m] height, 1[kW] nominal power turbine, fabricated to
Fig. 22. Variation of the CP with respect to TSR. operate in an urban area.
Considering the rotational periodicity of the turbine, and
neglecting tip effects, a two-dimensional Computational Fluid Dy-
namics (CFD) model was used to compute the aerodynamic
Table 8
3D CFD validation of the optimal solution. Comparison of the output power for the
response of the turbine. The Latin Hypercube Sampling technique
original VAWT without deflectors ([21,22]), and the VAWT with the optimized de- proved to be an adequate method to obtain a representative sample
flectors. u is proportional to TSR ¼ 0.4. of 300 designs, out of a total 8:36  106 possible deflector config-
Wind speed [m/s]
urations. Different network architectures were trained, and the best
metamodel showed an excellent agreement between the CFD
4 5 7 9 11 13 15
solver and its prediction, attaining a training correlation coefficient
u [RPM] 15 20 27 34 42 50 57 above 0.985 and a testing correlation coefficient above 0.973. The
Power VAWT (original) [W] e 83 227 486 902 1475 2263
use of the artificial neural network in the current optimization task
Power VAWT þ deflectors [W] 55 105 297 635 1162 1944 2978
Power improvement e 27% 31% 31% 29% 32% 32% allowed a substantial reduction of the computational cost in over
97% in contrast with the typical simulation-based optimization
approach if the correct sample size is chosen. The accuracy of the
metamodel was finally validated by using a three-dimensional CFD
original VAWT had almost null available power at that point. model of the turbine.
Fig. 23(a) presents the power curve comparison for the turbine Optimization results showed that the optimized shape of the
with and without deflectors. An schematic figure of the turbine deflectors is slightly curved. This can be attributed to the low wind
with the optimized deflectors is depicted in Fig. 23(b). speed used in the optimization process, in which flow detachment
The comparison of the CP for the VAWT without deflectors and vorticity do not have a significant effect. Also, the optimized
([21,22]), and the VAWT with the optimized deflectors is summa- size of the plates tends to maximize the shrouding of the convex
rized in Table 9. blades producing the negative torque, and the exit angle of the
plates tends to guide the incoming wind towards the concave

Fig. 23. 3D CFD validation of the optimized solution. (a) Comparison between the original VAWT without deflectors ([21,22]), and the VAWT with the optimized deflectors designed
in this work. (b) Scale image showing the VAWT with the optimized deflectors.
 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814 15

blades that produce the positive torque. The three-dimensional CFD In Fig.A.1 (b) the results of the proposed model are shown,
verification indicated that an outstanding efficiency increase of 30% representing in the coordinates axis the different values of TSR,
was achieved. It is important to remark that this improvement defined as
occurs at the same Tip Speed Ratio of 0.4 as that of the original
turbine. Furthermore, the turbine with the optimized deflectors is uR
TSR ¼ (A.1)
capable of producing output power at 4[m/s], a lower wind speed U
compared to the unimproved turbine.
The proposed methodology proved to be a robust tool to opti- with u in [rad/s]. It can be concluded that for TSR between 0.4 and
mize the aerodynamic performance of a turbine with a low 1.2 the values obtained for the C 2DP accurately approximate the
computational cost, having also a great potential as a comple- experimental and numerical results from Refs. [8,13], with a Root
mentary design tool for existing rotational machinery. Mean Squared Error of 7:267  103 . Thus, it can be concluded that
the configuration of the proposed CFD model is accurately defined.
Data availability

The processed data required to reproduce the results of this Appendix B. CFD mesh and timestep convergence analysis
work are available to download from https://data.mendeley.com/
datasets/jb2fbzpdb7/2, see Ref. [89].

Acknowledgments Table B.1

Mesh converge analysis for the two-dimensional CFD domain.

This work was developed with a great effort in an adverse ID Mesh Number of cells C 2D
P
context of budget cuts over the past three years in the Argentinian 1 1:589  105 0.153
scientific and technical research system. Regardless of the current 2 2:726  105 0.155
situation, the authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support 3 4:244  105 0.157
from Argentine Council for Scientific and Technical Research 4 7:714  105 0.157
(CONICET). A. E. Albanesi also acknowledges the National Techno-
logical University of Argentina (UTN) for Grants PID
ENUTNFE0004405 and PID MAUTIFE0005270TC, and the National
Agency of Scientific and Technological Promotion of Argentina
(ANPCYT) for the Grant PICT2015-3396.
A mesh convergence analysis was performed by taking four
different mesh sizes, generated with the open-source software
Appendix A. Validation of the two-dimensional CFD model
SALOME [88]. The analysis was performed with the following
parametrization of the deflector plates: r1 ¼ 156[cm], q1 ¼ 6½ ,
The numerical model was validated by comparison with the
Dr2 ¼ 12[cm], Dq2 ¼ 2½ , Dr3 ¼ 27[cm], Dq3 ¼ 1½ . Table B.1 briefs
experimental and numerical results obtained by Hayashi et al. [13]
the size and CFD response for each mesh, and it can be observed
and Mohamed et al. [8] respectively. Both of them analyze a con-
that for the meshes with ID 3 and 4, mesh size does not influence
ventional Savonius wind turbine depicted in Fig. A.1(a), which di-
the value of the C 2D
P . Hence, the mesh with ID 3 has been selected,
mensions in meters are D ¼ 0.330, d ¼ 0.184, S ¼ 0.380 and
since it represents the best compromise between computational
a ¼ 0.015. The length and width of the two-dimensional compu-
cost and accuracy.
tational domain are 30D and 20D respectively, and the distance
between the center of the turbine and the inlet is 10D.

Fig. A.1. (a) model of the validation turbine. (b) validation of the proposed numerical model.
16 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814

Fig. B.2. Timestep convergence analysis.

Appendix C. ANN overfitting verification

An early-stop criterion was employed when training the meta-

For the time step dependency analysis, four decreasing constant
values of time step were proposed based on the CFL condition. They
were set so as the CFL number would be small, avoiding numerical
instabilities. As it is shown in Fig. B.2, the torque data for a time step
of 0.005[s] is not accurate. A slight difference can be noticed on
torque values between using time steps of 0.002[s] and 0.001[s],
while such difference is negligible for time steps of 0.001[s] and
0.0008[s]. Finally, a time step of 0.001[s] was adopted.
models to avoid the overfitting, as it was detailed in Section 3.4. To
prove that the ANN is not overfitting, the same metamodel
configuration was trained without the early-stop criterion. It is
clearly seen in Fig. 3 that while the training reaches an R of 0.99998
(Fig. C.3(a)) and a MSE of 9:98  108 , when the ANN is applied to
the testing sample, R is 0.82533 (Fig. C.3(b)) and the maximum
Absolute Error is 3:97  102 . This is clearly an evidence of over-
fitting in contrast to the performance achieved by the metamodel
developed in this work with the overfitting control (R of 0.97338
and MSE of 2:154  104 ).

Fig. C.3. Regression plots without an early-stop criterion applied during training. (a) for the training sample, (b) for the testing sample.
 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814 17

References [31] El-Askary WA, Nasef MH, AbdEL-hamid AA, Gad HE. Harvesting wind energy
for improving performance of Savonius rotor. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn
2015;139:8e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2015.01.003.
[1] World Energy Scenarios. Composing energy futures to 2050. London: World
[32] Aryanezhad MB, Hemati Mohammad. A new genetic algorithm for solving
Energy Council; 2013.
nonconvex nonlinear programming problems. Appl Math Comput
[2] NREL. Net energy metering. 2017. https://www.nrel.gov/state-local-tribal/
2008;199(1):186e94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2007.09.047.
basics-net-metering.html.
[33] Lieberman Gerald J, Hillier Frederick S. Introduction to operations research.
[3] OFGEM. Feed-in tariff. 2017. https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/environmental-
McGraw-Hill Education Ltd; 2001, ISBN 125925318X.
programmes/fit/fit-tariff-rates.
[34] Bazaraa MS, Sherali HD, Shetty CM. Nonlinear Programming: theory and al-
[4] OFGEM. Renewable energy sources act. 2017. https://www.bmwi.de/
gorithms. John Wiley & Sons; 2006, ISBN 0471486000.
Redaktion/EN/Downloads/renewable-energy-sources-act-2017.pdf.

o

n de [35] Ryoo HS, Sahinidis NV. Global optimization of nonconvex NLPs and MINLPs
[5] Programa Prosumidores Santa Fe. Tarifa promocional para la inyecco

n renovable distribuida en baja tensio
n. Secretaria de Estado de la with applications in process design. Comput Chem Eng 1995;19(5):551e66.
generacio
https://doi.org/10.1016/0098-1354(94)00097-2.
Energía y Empresa Provincial de la Energía (EPE) de Santa Fe. Argentina; 2016.
[36] Sue Ellen Haupt Randy L. Haupt. Practical genetic algorithms. Wiley-Black-
[6] Jha AR. Wind turbine Technology. CRC Press; 2010. https://doi.org/10.1201/
well; 2004, ISBN 0471455652.
9781439815076.
[37] Koehler Gary J. New directions in genetic algorithm theory. Ann Oper Res
[7] Manwell JF, McGowan JG, Rogers AL. Wind energy explained. John Wiley &
1997;75:49e68. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1018928017332.
Sons, Ltd; 2012. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119994367.

venin D. Optimization of Savonius turbines [38] Barton Russell R, Meckesheimer Martin. Chapter 18 metamodel-based simu-
[8] Mohamed MH, Janiga G, Pap E, The
lation optimization. In: Simulation. Elsevier; 2006. p. 535e74. https://doi.org/
using an obstacle shielding the returning blade. Renew Energy 2010;35(11):
10.1016/s0927-0507(06)13018-2.
2618e26. ISSN 0960-1481.
[39] Simon Haykin. Neural networks: a Comprehensive Foundation. Prentice Hall;
[9] Antar E, Elkhoury M. Parametric sizing optimization process of a casing for a
1998, ISBN 978-0132733502.
savonius vertical Axis wind turbine. Renew Energy 2019;136:127e38. https://
[40] Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S. Metamodel based high-fidelity stochastic
doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.12.092.
analysis of composite laminates: a concise review with critical comparative
[10] Menet J-L. A double-step Savonius rotor for local production of electricity: a
assessment. Compos Struct 2017;171:227e50. https://doi.org/10.1016/
design study. Renew Energy 2004;29(11):1843e62.
j.compstruct.2017.01.061.
[11] Shaughnessy BM, Probert SD. Partially-blocked savonius rotor. Appl Energy
[41] Simpson TW, Poplinski JD, Koch PN, Allen JK. Metamodels for computer-based
1992;43(4):239e49. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-2619(92)90024-6.
engineering design: survey and recommendations. Eng Comput 2001;17(2):
[12] Huda MD, Selim MA, Sadrul Islam AKM, Islam MQ. Performance of an S-
129e50. https://doi.org/10.1007/pl00007198.
shaped savonius rotor with a deflecting plate. Int Energy J 1992;14(1):25e32.
[42] Soteris A. Kalogirou. Applications of artificial neural-networks for energy
[13] HAYASHI Tsutomu, Yan LI, Yutaka HARA. Wind tunnel tests on a different
systems. Appl Energy 2000;67(1e2):17e35. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0306-
phase three-stage savonius rotor. JSME International Journal Series B
2619(00)00005-2.
2005;48(1):9e16. https://doi.org/10.1299/jsmeb.48.9.
[43] Kalogirou Soteris A. Artificial neural networks in renewable energy systems
[14] Saha UK, Jaya Rajkumar M. On the performance analysis of Savonius rotor
applications: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2001;5(4):373e401.
with twisted blades. Renew Energy 2006;31(11):1776e88. https://doi.org/
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1364-0321(01)00006-5.
10.1016/j.renene.2005.08.030.
[44] Maruga
n Alberto Pliego, García M
arquez Fausto Pedro, Pinar Perez Jesus
[15] Irabu Kunio, Nath Roy Jitendro. Characteristics of wind power on Savonius
María, Ruiz-Herna
ndez Diego. A survey of artificial neural network in wind
rotor using a guide-box tunnel. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 2007;32(2):580e6.
energy systems. Appl Energy 2018;228:1822e36. https://doi.org/10.1016/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2007.06.008.
j.apenergy.2018.07.084.
[16] Kamoji MA, Kedare SB, Prabhu SV. Performance tests on helical Savonius ro-
[45] Sargolzaei J, Kianifar A. Modeling and simulation of wind turbine Savonius
tors. Renew Energy 2009;34(3):521e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/
rotors using artificial neural networks for estimation of the power ratio and
j.renene.2008.06.002.
€ an. An experimental torque. Simul Model Pract Theory 2009;17(7):1290e8. https://doi.org/
[17] Deda Altan Burçin, Atılgan Mehmet, Ozdamar Aydog
10.1016/j.simpat.2009.05.003.
study on improvement of a Savonius rotor performance with curtaining. Exp
[46] Kumar Debnath Biplab, Das Ranjan. Prediction of performance coefficients of a
Therm Fluid Sci 2008;32(8):1673e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/
three-bucket savonius rotor using artificial neural network. J Renew Sustain
j.expthermflusci.2008.06.006.
Energy 2010;2(4):043107. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3467510.
[18] Deda Altan Burçin, Atılgan Mehmet. The use of a curtain design to increase the
[47] Biswas A, Sarkar S, Gupta R. Application of artificial neural network for per-
performance level of a Savonius wind rotors. Renew Energy 2010;35(4):
formance evaluation of vertical axis wind turbine rotor. Int J Ambient Energy
821e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.08.025.
2014;37(2):209e18. https://doi.org/10.1080/01430750.2014.915889.
[19] Golecha Kailash, Eldho TI, Prabhu SV. Influence of the deflector plate on the
[48] Mohammadi M, Lakestani M, Mohamed MH. Intelligent parameter optimi-
performance of modified Savonius water turbine. Appl Energy 2011;88(9):
zation of savonius rotor using artificial neural network and genetic algorithm.
3207e17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.03.025.
Energy 2018;143:56e68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.10.121.
[20] Roy Sukanta, Saha Ujjwal K. Wind tunnel experiments of a newly developed
[49] Betz A. Windmills in the light of modern research. techreport 46. National
two-bladed Savonius-style wind turbine. Appl Energy 2015;137:117e25.
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics; 1928.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.10.022.
~ o y fabricacio

n de una turbina de eje vertical [50] Chong WT, Fazlizan A, Poh SC, Pan KC, Hew WP, Hsiao FB. The design,
[21] Tacca E, Spies L, Albanesi A. Disen
simulation and testing of an urban vertical axis wind turbine with the omni-
impulsada por dragvol. I. V Congreso Argentino de Ingeniería Mec
anica CAIM;
direction-guide-vane. Appl Energy 2013;112:601e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/
2016. p. 2016.
~ o computacional de una turbina de eje vertical impul- j.apenergy.2012.12.064.
[22] Spies L, Tacca E. Disen

nica. UTN - Fac- [51] McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ. A comparison of three methods for
sada por drag. Proyecto Final de Carrera de Ingeniería Meca
selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer
ultad Regioanal Santa Fe; 2017.
code. Technometrics 1979;21(2):239. https://doi.org/10.2307/1268522.
[23] Kacprzak Konrad, Liskiewicz Grzegorz, Sobczak Krzysztof. Numerical inves-
[52] Iman Ronald L, Conover WJ. A distribution-free approach to inducing rank
tigation of conventional and modified Savonius wind turbines. Renew Energy
correlation among input variables. Commun Stat Simulat Comput 1982;11(3):
2013;60:578e85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.06.009.
311e34. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918208812265.
[24] Menet JL. Aerodynamic behaviour of a new type of slow-running VAWT. In:
[53] Stein Michael. Large sample properties of simulations using Latin hypercube
Wind energy. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2007. p. 235e40.
sampling. Technometrics 1987;29(2):143e51. https://doi.org/10.1080/
[25] Adam Chehouri, Younes Rafic, Adrian Ilinca, Perron Jean. Review of perfor-
00401706.1987.10488205.
mance optimization techniques applied to wind turbines. Appl Energy
[54] Iman RL. Encyclopedia of statistical sciences, update Volume 3, Appendix A:
2015;142:361e88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.12.043.

venin D. Optimal blade shape of a modified Latin hypercube sampling. Technometrics 2000;42(3):325e6. https://doi.org/
[26] Mohamed MH, Janiga G, Pap E, The
10.1080/00401706.2000.10486085.
Savonius turbine using an obstacle shielding the returning blade. Energy
[55] Albanesi Alejandro, Roman Nadia, Bre Facundo, Fachinotti Victor.
Convers Manag 2011;52(1):236e42. https://doi.org/10.1016/
A metamodel-based optimization approach to reduce the weight of composite
j.enconman.2010.06.070.
laminated wind turbine blades. Compos Struct 2018a;194:345e56. https://
[27] Chan CM, Bai HL, He DQ. Blade shape optimization of the Savonius wind
doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.04.015.
turbine using a genetic algorithm. Appl Energy 2018;213:148e57. https://
[56] Code_Saturne an open source CFD software. URL http://code-saturne.org/cms.
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.01.029.
[57] Archambeau F, Me
chitoua N, Sakiz M. Code saturne: a finite Volume code for
[28] Zhou Qianwei, Zhang Xu, Cheng Shengyong, Huang Yujiao, Xiao Jie. Innova-
the computation of turbulent incompressible flows - industrial applications.
tive Savonius rotors evolved by genetic algorithm based on 2D-DCT encoding.
Int J Finite Vol 2004;1(1):1e62.
Soft Computing 2018;22(23):8001e10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-
[58] Moukalled F, Mangani L, Darwish M. The finite Volume method in computa-
3214-x.
tional Fluid Dynamics. Springer International Publishing; 2015.
[29] Goldberg David E, Holland John H. Genetic algorithms and machine learning.
[59] Ferziger Joel H, Peric Milovan. Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics.
Mach Learn 1988;3(2/3):95e9. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022602019183.
Springer International Publishing; 2002.
[30] Tian Wenlong, Mao Zhaoyong, Zhang Baoshou, Li Yanjun. Shape optimization
[60] Versteeg H, Malalasekera W. An introduction to computational Fluid Dy-
of a Savonius wind rotor with different convex and concave sides. Renew
namics: the finite Volume method. pearson; 2007, ISBN 978-0131274983.
Energy 2018;117:287e99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.10.067.
[61] Jang DS, Jetli R, Acharya S. Comparison of the piso, simpler, and simplec
18 B.A. Storti et al. / Energy 186 (2019) 115814
algorithms for the treatment of the pressure-velocity coupling in steady flow
problems. Numer Heat Transf sep 1986;10(3):209e28. https://doi.org/
10.1080/10407788608913517.
[62] Barth T, Jespersen D. The design and application of upwind schemes on un-
structured meshes. In: 27th aerospace Sciences Meeting. American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics; 1989. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1989-366.
[63] Tamamidis Panos, Dennis N. Assanis. Evaluation of various high-order-
accuracy schemes with and without flux limiters. Int J Numer Methods
Fluids 1993;16(10):931e48. https://doi.org/10.1002/fld.1650161006.
[64] Norris Stuart Edward. A parallel NaviereStokes solver for natural convection
and free surface flow. phdthesis. Sydney, Australia: Department of Mechanical
Engineering, University of Sydney; 2000.
[65] Code_Saturne: Theory guide. URL http://code-saturne.org/cms/sites/default/
files/docs/5.0/theory.pdf.
[66] The
Jesse, Yu Hesheng. A critical review on the simulations of wind turbine
aerodynamics focusing on hybrid RANS-LES methods. Energy 2017;138:
257e89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.07.028.
[67] Balduzzi Francesco, Alessandro Bianchini, Maleci Riccardo, Ferrara Giovanni,
Ferrari Lorenzo. Critical issues in the CFD simulation of darrieus wind tur-
bines. Renew Energy 2016;85:419e35. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2015.06.048.
[68] Tsan-Hsing Shih, Liou William W, Shabbir Aamir, Yang Zhigang, Jiang Zhu.
A new k-e eddy viscosity model for high Reynolds number turbulent flows.
Comput Fluid 1995;24(3):227e38. https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7930(94)
00032-t.
[69] Menter FR. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering
applications. AIAA J 1994;32(8):1598e605. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.12149.
[70] Menter FR, Kuntz M. Ten years of industrial experience with the sst turbu-
lence model. Turbulence, heat and mass transfer 2003;4(1):625e32.
[71] Daro
czy L

, Janiga Ga
aszlo
bor, Petrasch Klaus, Webner Michael,
The
venin Dominique. Comparative analysis of turbulence models for the
aerodynamic simulation of h-darrieus rotors. Energy 2015;90:680e90.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2015.07.102.
[72] Tachos NS, Filios AE, Margaris DP. A comparative numerical study of four
turbulence models for the prediction of horizontal axis wind turbine flow.
Proc Inst Mech Eng C J Mech Eng Sci 2010;224(9):1973e9. https://doi.org/
10.1243/09544062jmes1901.
[73] Jaohindy P, Ennamiri H, Garde F, Bastide A. Numerical investigation of airflow
through a savonius rotor. Wind Energy 2013;17(6):853e68. https://doi.org/
10.1002/we.1601.
[74] Orlandi A, Collu M, Zanforlin S, Shires A. 3d URANS analysis of a vertical axis
wind turbine in skewed flows. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 2015;147:77e84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2015.09.010.
[75] Fonseca DJ, Navaresse DO, Moynihan GP. Simulation metamodeling through
artificial neural networks. Eng Appl Artif Intell 2003;16(3):177e83. https://
doi.org/10.1016/s0952-1976(03)00043-5.
[76] Natick Massachusetts United States. The MathWorks. Inc. Matlab release;
2016b.
[77] Albanesi Alejandro, Bre Facundo, Fachinotti Victor, Gebhardt Cristian. Simul-
taneous ply-order, ply-number and ply-drop optimization of laminate wind
turbine blades using the inverse finite element method. Compos Struct
2018b;184:894e903. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.10.051.
[78] Deep Kusum, Singh Krishna Pratap, Kansal ML, Mohan C. A real coded genetic
algorithm for solving integer and mixed integer optimization problems. Appl
Math Comput 2009;212(2):505e18. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.amc.2009.02.044.
[79] Holland John H. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press; 1975.
[80] Goldberg DE. Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine
learning. New York, USA: Addison-Wesley; 1989.
[81] Deep Kusum, Thakur Manoj. A new crossover operator for real coded genetic
algorithms. Appl Math Comput 2007a;188(1):895e911. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.amc.2006.10.047.
[82] Deep Kusum, Thakur Manoj. A new mutation operator for real coded genetic
algorithms. Appl Math Comput 2007b;193(1):211e30. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.amc.2007.03.046.
[83] Bre Facundo, Arthur Santos Silva, Ghisi Enedir, Víctor D, Fachinotti. Residential
building design optimisation using sensitivity analysis and genetic algorithm.
Energy Build 2016;133:853e66. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.enbuild.2016.10.025.
[84] Deb Kalyanmoy. An efficient constraint handling method for genetic algo-
rithms. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 2000;186(2e4):311e38. https://
doi.org/10.1016/s0045-7825(99)00389-8.
[85] Seshat. http://www.cimec.org.ar/c3/seshat/; 2018.
[86] Centro de investigacio
n de me
todos computacionales (cimec). 2018. http://
www.cimec.org.ar.
[87] Jeon Keum Soo, Jeong Jun Ik, Pan Jae-Kyung, Ryu Ki-Wahn. Effects of end
plates with various shapes and sizes on helical savonius wind turbines. Renew
Energy 2015;79:167e76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.11.035.
[88] Salome. Open cascade edf cea. gnu lesser general public license. 2007. www.
salome-platform.org.
[89] Storti BA, Dorella JJ, Roman ND, Peralta I, Albanesi AE. Processed data for the
work entitled “Improving the efficiency of a Savonius wind turbine by
designing a set of deflector plates with a metamodel-based optimization
approach”. 2018. https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/jb2fbzpdb7/1.