Omputational Airfoil Optimization For The Improvement of The Performance of Orizontal XIS IND Urbines With A Model

COMPUTATIONAL AIRFOIL OPTIMIZATION FOR
THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE PERFORMANCE OF
HORIZONTAL AXIS WIND TURBINES (HAWT)

WITH A 3D MODEL
COMPUTERGESTÜTZTE TRAGFLÄCHENOPTIMIERUNG ZUR

LEISTUNGSVERBESSERUNG VON WINDTURBINEN MIT
HORIZONTALER ACHSE (HAWT) MIT EINEM 3D-MODELL
Der Technischen Fakultät

Dem Fachbereich Lehrstuhl für Fluidmechanik
der Friedrich-Alexander-Universität
Erlangen-Nürnberg
zur
Erlangung des Doktorgrades Dr.-Ing.
vorgelegt von
YouJin Kim
aus Busan (Südkorea)
Als Dissertation genehmigt
von der Technischen Fakultät
vom Fachbereich Lehrstuhl für Fluidmechanik
der Friedirch-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
Tag der Mündliche Prüfung: 8th November 2019
Vorsitzender der Promotionsorgans: Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Andreas Paul Fröba

Gutachter: Prof. Dr. –Ing. habil. Antonio Delgado,
Prof. Dr. Taeseong Kim (Loughborough University, UK)
2
Dedicated to my 아바 아버지
iii
DECLARATION
Ich versichere, dass ich die Arbeit ohne fremde Hilfe und ohne Benutzung
anderer als der angegebenen Quellen angefertigt habe, und dass die Arbeit in
gleicher oder ähnlicher Form noch keiner anderen Prüfungsbehörde vorgelegen
hat und von dieser als Teil einer Prüfungsleistung angenommen wurde. Alle
Ausführungen, die wörtlich oder sinngemäß übernommen wurden, sind als solche
gekennzeichnet.
I hereby declare that this thesis is my own work to the best of my knowledge
and belief without any help and without the use of sources other than those stated
in the thesis. This thesis has not previously been presented to any other
examination board and has not been previously published in identical or similar
form. All information taken from other sources is acknowledged as references.
Busan, 7th May, 2020

____________________________________
YouJin Kim
iv
ABSTRACT
The usage of wind turbines as an alternative source of energy is increasing

globally. The improvement of the performance of wind turbines can lower the cost
of this type of energy and secure ongoing success. Various aspects can lead to
improvements in performance. This study focuses on the computer-aided
investigation of aerodynamic performance, which can be improved by
optimization of the airfoil shape and its boundary layer.
A focus is on the role of the laminar boundary layer on the blade airfoil in
improving the aerodynamic performance of the wind turbine. The profile was
optimized by means of a Genetic Algorithm (GA). After the optimization, the
physical relationship between the laminar boundary layer and three-dimensional
rotating augmentation of the wind turbine rotor was found by implementation of
the 3D correction code.
The Gliding Ratio (GR), transition points, boundary layer thickness, and friction
coefficient distributions, which were calculated with the software XFOIL and
RFOIL, show that the optimized airfoil has the shape with larger boundary layer
and higher GR than the reference profile. The 3D-corrected polar data, calculated
by Hansen’s correction law, were used for the calculation of the power production
for two different wind turbines. It is to demonstrate that the optimized airfoil
shape can influence the wind turbine to produce greatly increased power
production. The optimized airfoil gives higher sensitivity on the 3D rotational
effect, which makes the optimized one has higher torque and the constant thrust of
the blade compared to the reference.
The Coriolis force related to the three-dimensional rotation of the rotor
generated radial momentum of the blade, which moved the separation bubble
towards the tip, while the delayed transition point decreased the separation
bubble formation. The optimized airfoil had smaller stall regions and fewer bubble
occurrences than the reference airfoil. This is shown in the comparisons of the
two-dimensional CFD flow simulation, which was performed with CFD OpenFoam
for both airfoils.
v
This study tries to close a knowledge gap in the area of laminar boundary layer
considerations of the airfoils of the wind turbine blade. The knowledge gap existed,
because the laminar layer in wind turbine and aeronautic applications was
considered to be an unimportant and in reality, scarcely-existing region by most
researchers and was therefore not emphasized in previous research. Furthermore,
the investigations on the physical connection between the airfoil boundary layer
and three-dimensional rotating augmentation of wind turbines can serve as a
cornerstone for future research on improving the prediction accuracy in the
aerodynamic design of wind turbine blades with three-dimensional rotation.
The performance improvements of wind turbines given by the slight change of
the airfoil curvature can be a great insight for effective aerodynamic improvement
in further airfoil research. This airfoil optimization with a laminar boundary layer
also demonstrates the connection between the airfoil and the holistic performance
improvement of the wind turbine, including aerodynamics and structural stability
at the same time.
vi
KURZFASSUNG
Die Nutzung von Windkraftanlagen als alternative Energiequelle erfährt einen

weltweiten Anstieg. Eine Verbesserung der Leistungsfähigkeit von
Windkraftanlagen kann die Kosten für diese Form der Energie senken und einen
anhaltenden Erfolg der Technologie sicherstellen.
Verschiedene Aspekte können zu einer Verbesserung der Leistungsfähigkeit
führen. Diese Studie konzentriert sich auf computergestützte Untersuchungen der
aerodynamische Eigenschaften, die durch eine Optimierung der Rotorblattform
und ihrer Grenzschicht verbessert werden kann.
Ein besonderer Schwerpunkt liegt auf der Bedeutung der laminaren
Grenzschicht am Flügelprofil zur Verbesserung der aerodynamischen
Leistungsfähigkeit der Windturbine. Das Profil wurde mit Hilfe eines Genetischen
Algorithmus (GA) optimiert. Nach der Optimierung wurde die physikalische
Beziehung zwischen der laminaren Grenzschicht und der dreidimensionalen
Rotationsaugmentation des Windturbinenrotors durch die Implementierung eines
3D-Korrekturfaktors gefunden.
Gleitzahlwerte, Ü bergangspunkte, Grenzschichtdicke und die Verteilung des
Reibungskoeffizienten, die von der Software XFOIL und RFOIL berechnet wurden,
zeigen, dass das optimierte Flügelprofil eine größ ere Grenzschichtregion als das
Referenzprofil aufweist. Die 3D-korrigierten Profildaten, berechnet nach dem
Korrekturgesetz von Hansen, wurden in der Berechnung der Stromproduktion
zweier verschiedener Windturbinen verwendet, um zu zeigen, dass das optimierte
Profil zu einer Verdoppelung der Stromproduktion führen kann. Das optimierte
Schaufelblatt bietet eine höhere Empfindlichkeit für den 3D-Rotationseffekt,
wodurch das es im Vergleich zur Referenz ein höheres Drehmoment und einen
konstanten Schub der Schaufel aufweist.
Die Corioliskraft, die mit der dreidimensionalen Rotation des Rotors in
Beziehung steht, erzeugt ein Biegemoment am Flügel, das die Ablöseblase in
Richtung der Hinterkante bewegt, während der verlagerte Ü bergangspunkt die
Ausbildung der Ablöseblase verringert. Das optimierte Profil zeigte im Vergleich
vii
zum Referenzprofil kleinere Strömungsabrissbereiche und ein geringeres
Auftreten von Ablöseblasen.
Dies wird im Vergleich der zweidimensionalen CFD-Strömungssimulation
ersichtlich, die in OpenFoam für beide Flügelprofile durchgeführt wurde.
Die Ergebnisse dieser Studie schließ en eine Wissenslücke im Bereich der
laminaren Grenzschichtbetrachtung des Strömungsprofils bei
Windturbinenblättern. Diese Wissenslücke existierte, da die laminare Grenzschicht
in Windturbinen- und Luftfahrtanwendungen von den meisten Forschern als eine
unbedeutende und in der Realität kaum existierende Region betrachtet wurde und
daher in der Forschung bisher keine Beachtung gefunden hat. Des Weiteren kann
die Untersuchung der physikalischen Verbindung zwischen
Flügelprofilgrenzschicht und dreidimensionaler Rotationsaugmentation als
Grundlage für zukünftige Forschung an der Verbesserung der
Vorhersagegenauigkeit im aerodynamischen Design von Windturbinenblättern mit
dreidimensionaler Rotation dienen.
Die Leistungsverbesserungen von Windkraftanlagen durch die geringfügige
Ä nderung der Tragflächenkrümmung können ein wertvolle Erkenntnis für eine
effektive aerodynamische Verbesserung in der weiteren Tragflächenforschung
darstellen. Diese Tragflächenoptimierung mit einer laminaren Grenzschicht zeigt
auch den Zusammenhang zwischen dem Tragflächenprofil und der ganzheitlichen
Leistungsverbesserung der Windkraftanlage, einschließ lich Aerodynamik und
struktureller Stabilität.
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
For this thesis to be completed, Prof. Antonio Delgado is gratefully thanked for
his professional scientific teaching and abundantly kind heart. Dr. Ali Al-Abadi,
who was my first supervisor on wind energy, is also acknowledged as a thoughtful
and influential teacher for me. My German friends Ursula Witter and Frank
Mittmann should be mentioned with my gratitude for their kind hearts in
supporting my studies since our master’s student time. I also want to say thank
you to Dr. Sebastian Schafhirt for his kind help in my German abstract. Deepest
thanks go to Mrs. Elizabeth Lunyou Bardhan, who spiritually and emotionally
supported my long and hard work.
I acknowledge the depth of my parent’s love for raising me and supporting my
aim to be an academically independent woman scientist from an Asian culture. I
am grateful to my friends in South Korea and Germany.
The BB21 project supported by Busan Metropolitan City is acknowledged for
financial support.
Thank you to Kayla Friedman and Malcolm Morgan of the Centre for Sustainable
Development, University of Cambridge, UK, for producing the Microsoft Word
thesis template used to produce this document.
ix
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................19
1.1 WIND ENERGY ........................................................................................................................19
1.2 AIRFOIL DESIGN ......................................................................................................................22
1.3 NUMERICAL METHODS ...........................................................................................................25
1.4 MOTIVATION ...........................................................................................................................31
2 SELECTED THEORETICAL ASPECTS ...................................................................................33
2.1 WIND TURBINE AIRFOIL ........................................................................................................33
2.1.1 Airfoil design ..............................................................................................................33
2.1.2 Fluid flow over an airfoil........................................................................................34
2.1.3 Genetic algorithm optimization ..........................................................................44
2.2 CFD SIMULATION ...................................................................................................................51
2.2.1 Wind turbine design theory .................................................................................57
2.2.2 Performance prediction .........................................................................................60
2.2.3 Wind turbine control...............................................................................................66
2.2.4 3D rotational effect ..................................................................................................68
3 METHODS EMPLOYED .............................................................................................................71
3.1 AIRFOIL OPTIMIZATION .........................................................................................................72
3.2 AIRFOIL CFD SIMULATION ....................................................................................................77
3.2.1 Mesh...............................................................................................................................77
3.2.2 OpenFoam simulation.............................................................................................78
3.3 HAWT PERFORMANCE SIMULATION ...................................................................................79
3.3.1 Qblade ...........................................................................................................................79
3.3.2 Simulation with 3D correction ............................................................................84
4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION....................................................................................................85
4.2.1 Airfoil shape and Blade ..........................................................................................88
4.2.2 Pressure Coefficient .................................................................................................92
4.2.3 Lift and Drag Coefficient ........................................................................................94
4.2.4 Boundary layer results ...........................................................................................99
4.2.5 Power Curve with 3D correction ..................................................................... 103
4.4.2 Comparison of experiment and CFD .............................................................. 123
x
5 CONCLUSION AND OUTLOOK............................................................................................. 124
6 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 126
7 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 142
xi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1. COMPARISON BETWEEN CONCEPT IN BIOLOGICAL GA AND CURRENT AIRFOIL
DESIGN.............................................................................................................................................72
TABLE 2. THE MAIN M.FILE OF GA OPTIMIZATION ...............................................................85

TABLE 3. AIRFOIL PROPERTIES ...............................................................................................88
TABLE 4. GR, TRANSITION VALUES OF TOP AND BOTTOM EACH AIRFOILS AT ALPHA=7°,
RE=𝟏𝟎𝟔 ........................................................................................................................................89
TABLE 5. BLADE DESIGN INFORMATION [154] .....................................................................91
TABLE 6. CL, CD, TANGENTIAL FORCE OF BLADES WITH TWO AIRFOILS AT POS= 1.28M
AND 4M ........................................................................................................................................ 111
TABLE 7. SIN(𝝍) AND COS(𝝍) VALUES AT INFLOW ANGLE 𝝍 AT BLADE POS=4M....... 111
TABLE 8. CALCULATED VALUES OF EACH TERM AT EQUATION (45), (46) AT BLADE
POS=4M ...................................................................................................................................... 111
TABLE 9. ANGLE OF ATTACK (°) VALUES OF EACH AIRFOIL AT DIFFERENT FLOW REGIME
...................................................................................................................................................... 113
TABLE 10. COMMON AND DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF CFD AND EXPERIMENT ................... 123
xii
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1. INSTALLED CAPACITY [MW] OF WIND ENERGY FROM IRENA DATA [3] ......20
FIGURE 2. WIND ENERGY AMONG DIFFERENT RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES [3] ...........20
FIGURE 3. INSTALLED CAPACITY [MW] OF THE NATIONS, WWEA [4] ............................21
FIGURE 4. WINDMILL OF JOHN SMEATON [6, 7] ...................................................................23
FIGURE 5. BIRD WING INSPIRATION TO OTTO LILIENTHAL [8] ...........................................24
FIGURE 6. AIRFOIL FAMILIES [12] ..........................................................................................24
FIGURE 7. COMPUTER CODES USED IN WIND TURBINE DESIGN [21]...................................26
FIGURE 8. THE WAKE GENERATED BY 3D ROTATION OF THE NREL PHASE VI WIND
TURBINE [70] ................................................................................................................................27
FIGURE 9. AIRFOIL FOR WIND TURBINE .................................................................................34

FIGURE 10. AIRFOIL PARAMETERS FOR AERODYNAMICS [77] ............................................36
FIGURE 11. LAMINAR SEPARATION BUBBLE (LSB) STRUCTURE [180] ...........................41
FIGURE 12. AIRFOIL BOUNDARY LAYER AND SEPARATION [167].......................................42
FIGURE 13. ALLELE CONCEPT OF PARTICULATE GENES OF MENDEL [62] .........................46
FIGURE 14. GENE STRUCTURE FROM CHROMOSOME AND CELL [63] ..................................47
FIGURE 15. AIRFOIL PARAMETERIZED BY B-SPLINE WITH 13 CONTROL POINTS [98] ....50
FIGURE 16. ACTUATOR DISC MODEL OF A WIND TURBINE [125] .......................................58
FIGURE 17. BETZ TRIANGLE [125] ........................................................................................60
FIGURE 18. ROTOR SECTION CONCEPT [64] .........................................................................62
FIGURE 19. DIMENSION REDUCTION AND FLOW FIELD SIMPLIFICATION OF LLT [127] ..63
FIGURE 20. WAKE GEOMETRY PROLONGATION [127] ........................................................65
FIGURE 21. WIND TURBINE CONTROL REGIME [138] .........................................................67
FIGURE 22. ACTIVE STALL CONTROL AT RATED (LEFT) AND ABOVE RATED (RIGHT) WIND
SPEED [140] ..................................................................................................................................67
FIGURE 23. VELOCITY TRIANGLE AT THE (Z, 𝜣) PLANE [42] .............................................68

FIGURE 24. PRESSURE TRANSDUCER FOR 3D MEASUREMENT [148] ................................70
FIGURE 25. THE WHOLE PROCESS FROM THE OPTIMIZATION TO PERFORMANCE
PREDICTION ....................................................................................................................................71
FIGURE 26. BIRD BEAKS IN NATURAL SELECTION AND AIRFOIL SHAPE IN GA

ENVIRONMENT................................................................................................................................73
xiii
FIGURE 27. AIRFOIL SHAPED WITH B-SPLINE TO BE FITTED AS THE REFERENCE AIRFOIL
S809 ...............................................................................................................................................74
FIGURE 28. DATA STRUCTURE EXAMPLE IN GENETIC ALGORITHM [91] ...........................75
FIGURE 29. MESH GEOMETRY .................................................................................................77
FIGURE 30. MESH OF AIRFOIL S809GX CLOSE TO THE AIRFOIL WALL. ...............................77
FIGURE 31. PARAVIEW FOR S809GX FLOW VISUALIZATION IN DYNAMIC STALL ..............79
FIGURE 32. BLADE CONSTRUCTION FROM QBLADE ..............................................................80
FIGURE 33. REFERENCE AIRFOIL S809 AND AIRFOIL S809GX FOR XFOIL ANALYSIS .....80
FIGURE 34. EXTRAPOLATION BY MONTGOMERIE METHOD .................................................81
FIGURE 35. BLADE CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................................82
FIGURE 36. ROTOR PERFORMANCE ........................................................................................82
FIGURE 37. TURBINE SIMULATION FROM BEM ....................................................................83
FIGURE 38. 3D POLAR CORRECTIONS OF DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE BLADE .................84
FIGURE 39. UPPER AND LOWER BOUNDS FOR THE B-SPLINE SHAPED AIRFOIL .................86
FIGURE 40. THE PROCESS OF THE GENETIC ALGORITHM INTERFACED WITH XFOIL.......87
FIGURE 41. OPTIMIZED AIRFOIL S809GX AND REFERENCE S809......................................88
FIGURE 42. BLADE 3D DESIGN WITH AIRFOIL S809 (LEFT) AND S809GX (RIGHT) .......89
FIGURE 43. BLADE DESIGN TOP VIEW WITH S809GX (LEFT) AND S809(RIGHT) ...........90
FIGURE 44. BLADE DESIGN WITH S809GX (LEFT) AND S809 (RIGHT) ............................90
FIGURE 45. 𝑪𝒑 OF S809 AND S809GX WITH EXPERIMENT [154] AT ALPHA=1°..........92
FIGURE 46. 𝑪𝒑 OF S809 AND S809GX WITH EXPERIMENT[154] AT ALPHA=5.2° .......93
FIGURE 47. 𝑪𝒑 OF S809 AND S809GX WITH EXPERIMENTAL RESULT [154] AT
ALPHA=8.5° .................................................................................................................................93
FIGURE 48. 𝑪𝒍 – ALPHA OF AIRFOIL S809 AND S809GX AND EXPERIMENT [154] AT
RE= 𝟏𝟎𝟔 .......................................................................................................................................94
FIGURE 49. 𝑪𝒍 –𝑪𝒅 OF AIRFOIL S809 AND S809GX AND EXPERIMENT [154] AT RE=
𝟏𝟎𝟔.................................................................................................................................................94
FIGURE 50. GR-ALPHA OF THE AIRFOILS FROM XFOIL (LEFT) AND RFOIL (RIGHT) ....95
FIGURE 51. GR-ALPHA VALUES FOR THE AIRFOILS AT EACH PART OF THE BLADE ...........96
FIGURE 52. 𝑪𝒍-ALPHA VALUES FOR AIRFOILS AT EACH PART OF THE BLADE ....................96
xiv
FIGURE 53. 𝑪𝒅-ALPHA VALUES WITH CD ANALYSIS, ROOT PART .......................................97
FIGURE 54. CD-ALPHA VALUES WITH CD ANALYSIS (ROOT PART) .....................................98
FIGURE 55. CD-ALPHA VALUES WITH CD ANALYSIS (MIDDLE PART) .................................98
FIGURE 56. CD-ALPHA VALUES WITH CD ANALYSIS (TIP PART) .........................................98
FIGURE 57. TRANSITION POINT (XTR) ON THE TOP OF TWO AIRFOILS AT DIFFERENT
ALPHA, RE=𝟏𝟎𝟔 ....................................................................................................................... 100
FIGURE 58. TRANSITION POINT (XTR) ON THE BOTTOM OF TWO AIRFOILS AT DIFFERENT
ALPHA, RE=𝟏𝟎𝟔 ....................................................................................................................... 100
FIGURE 59. BOUNDARY LAYER THICKNESS OF S809 AND S809GX AT ROOT SECTION .. 101
FIGURE 60. FRICTION COEFFICIENT CF OF TWO AIRFOILS AT ROOT SECTION ................. 102
FIGURE 61. BOUNDARY LAYER THICKNESS OF S809 AND S809GX AT MIDDLE SECTION
...................................................................................................................................................... 102
FIGURE 62. FRICTION COEFFICIENT CF OF TWO AIRFOILS AT MIDDLE SECTION ............. 103
FIGURE 63. S809GX CL WITH 3D CORRECTION LAW AT BLADE SECTION 30% ............ 104
FIGURE 66. THE POWER CALCULATED WITH 3D CORRECTION COMPARED WITH THE
EXPERIMENTAL DATA ................................................................................................................. 107
FIGURE 67. TORQUE OVER VELOCITY OF BLADE WITH REFERENCE AND OPTIMIZED
AIRFOIL......................................................................................................................................... 108
FIGURE 68. THRUST OVER VELOCITY OF BLADE WITH REFERENCE AND OPTIMIZED
AIRFOIL......................................................................................................................................... 108
FIGURE 69. CL OVER BLADE POSITION FOR TURBINE BLADE WITH REFERENCE AND
OPTIMIZED AIRFOIL ..................................................................................................................... 109
FIGURE 70. CD OVER BLADE POSITION FOR TURBINE BLADE WITH TWO AIRFOILS ........ 110
FIGURE 71. TANGENTIAL FORCE OVER BLADE POSITION FOR TURBINE BLADE WITH TWO
AIRFOILS ....................................................................................................................................... 110
FIGURE 72. FLOW CHARACTERISTICS OF BLADE WITH S809 WITH GR ......................... 114
FIGURE 73. FLOW CHARACTERISTICS OF BLADE WITH S809 WITH GR ......................... 114
FIGURE 74. FLOW CHARACTERISTICS OF BLADE WITH S809GX WITH VELOCITY.......... 114
FIGURE 75. FLOW CHARACTERISTICS OF BLADE WITH S809GX WITH VELOCITY.......... 115
xv
FIGURE 76. −𝑪𝒑 VALUES OF S809 COMPARED TO THE EXPERIMENT AT ALPHA = 12.2°
[194] ........................................................................................................................................... 116
FIGURE 77. −𝑪𝒑 VALUES OF S809 COMPARED TO THE EXPERIMENT AT ALPHA = 20°
[194] ........................................................................................................................................... 116
FIGURE 78. -𝑪𝒑 OF AIRFOIL S809 AND S809GX AT ALPHA=12.2° .............................. 117
FIGURE 79. 𝑪𝒑 AND CONTOUR LINE OF AIRFOIL S809 AT ALPHA=12.2° .................... 117
FIGURE 80. 𝑪𝒑 AND CONTOUR LINE OF AIRFOIL S809GX AT ALPHA=12.2° ............... 118
FIGURE 81. VELOCITY LIC OF AIRFOIL S809 AT ALPHA=12.2° .................................... 119
FIGURE 82. VELOCITY LIC OF AIRFOIL S809GX AT ALPHA=12.2° ................................ 119
FIGURE 83. –𝑪𝒑 OF AIRFOIL S809 AND S809GX AT ALPHA=20° ................................ 120
FIGURE 84. 𝑪𝒑 AND CONTOUR LINE OF AIRFOIL S809 AT ALPHA=20° ........................ 121
FIGURE 85. 𝑪𝒑 AND CONTOUR LINE OF AIRFOIL S809 AT ALPHA=20° ........................ 121
FIGURE 86. VELOCITY LIC AT AIRFOIL S809 AT ALPHA=20° ........................................ 122
FIGURE 87. VELOCITY LIC AT AIRFOIL S809GX AT ALPHA=20° ................................... 122
xvi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
AOA (Alpha) Angle of Attack
AEP Annual Energy Production
BEM Blade Element Method
pos Blade radius [m]
𝐷∗ Boundary layer thickness
CFD Computational fluid dynamics
DNA Deoxyribo Nucleic Acid
𝐶𝑑 Drag coefficient
FEM Finite Element Method
𝐶𝑑(𝑓) Friction drag coefficient
GA Genetic Algorithm
GR Glide Ratio
HAWT Horizontal axis wind turbine
𝑈𝑥 Incoming velocity in x direction
𝑈𝑦 Incoming velocity in y direction
𝐶𝑙 Lift coefficient
LLT Lifting Line Theory
LIC Line Integral Convolution
N.S. Navier-Stokes Equation
PDEs Partial Differential Equations
𝑃 Power [W]
𝐶𝑝 Pressure Coefficient
𝐶𝑝(𝑓) Pressure drag coefficient
RANS Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes equation
rpm Rotation per minute
𝐶𝑓 Skin friction coefficient
𝐶𝑡 Thrust coefficient
TSR Tip Speed Ratio
𝑉 Velocity [m/s]
xvii
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 S809GX COORDINATES ................................................................................... 143

APPENDIX 2 ROTOR BLADE TABLE ...................................................................................... 147
APPENDIX 3 OPENFOAM DIRECTORY 0 .............................................................................. 148
APPENDIX 4 RFOIL RESULTS ............................................................................................... 152
APPENDIX 5 BASELINE COMPUTER ...................................................................................... 154
xviii
Chapter 1: Introduction
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Wind Energy

The new energy technology which is alternative and sustainable for the
problems and limits of currently dominant energy sources, such as fossil fuels and
nuclear power, has been already discussed in many fields of societies [1, 2].
Among different kinds of alternative energy like solar, hydropower, biofuels,
etc., the wind energy has its own development history and portion to be placed as
one of the major alternative energy sources [3]. The installed capacity grows very
fast and its usage is constantly on the rise while the costs have been reduced,
Figure 1, Figure 2.
The increasing installed wind energy capacity can be contrasted with the
reduced usage of conventional energy technology, such as fuel oil, coal, and gas [4].
Although the conventional energy supply sources are largely subsidized, the wind
energy capacity added to the grid in a large number of markets around the world is
observed to be competitive against the conventional supply due to its cost stability,
advantageous utilities, and independent power producers, etc.
The globally increasing financial investment, the long-term goal of climate
negotiations promised by 186 countries in the Paris Agreement, and the
decreasing costs with the advancement of the technology are factors which
19
encourage the continuous growth of wind energy in the future. Figure 4 shows the
increasing wind energy installed capacity for each nation up to 2019, [4].
Figure 1. Installed Capacity [MW] of Wind Energy from IRENA data [3]
Figure 2. Wind Energy among different renewable energy sources [3]
20
Figure 3. Installed Capacity [MW] of the nations, WWEA [4]
Based on the previously discussed usefulness of wind energy, innovative

technology development is necessary to provide solutions for the challenges in this
field. Creative scientific contributions are responsible for improving the reliability
and predictability of this technology. This thesis also aims to explain a contribution
to improving efficiency in energy generation. Among many directions to achieve
this, the focus is on the increase of the wind turbine performance with the
emphasis of the aerodynamic aspects. The sectional shape of the blade, airfoil, is to
be investigated.
21
1.2 Airfoil Design

The geometric shape for mechanical force generation from the motion between
the curvature of an airfoil and the surrounding airflow is called the airfoil [5]. The
power production of a wind turbine is affected by the geometry of the blade
airfoils. Because the lifting efficiency is influenced by the airfoil, which impacts the
productivity of the energy conversion of the turbine [66].
The curved plate shapes which contribute to different kinds of machines
described by John Smeaton and H.F. Phillip were mentioned as the first reference
of the airfoil shape [6, 7], Figure 4. The birds’ wing shape observed by Otto
Lilienthal inspired the invention of the first airplane by the Wright brothers [8],
Figure 5. Santos-Dumont and Louis Bl𝑒́ riot made airfoils with slight camber [9, 10].
The advantages of a thick airfoil advantage were discovered by Ludwig Prandtl
through mathematical description and wind tunnel tests in 1917 [11]. Specific
airfoil families were generated by the U.S. National Advisory Committee for
Aeronautics (NACA) in the 1930s, and still influence airfoil design in today’s
applications [12], Figure 6. Eastman Jacobs proposed an airfoil design to generate
the required pressure distribution, which was opposite to the conventional
procedure. A higher Glide Ratio and smaller drag resulted from this method after
an increase in the laminar flow of the airfoil [13].
Different airfoil types have continuously been designed. The airfoil used in wind
turbine blade design was first adopted from the shapes used in aeronautic
applications. In 1993, Hansen and Butterfield developed an airfoil series for HAWT
blades with thin airfoils on the tip and a thick airfoil for the root [14]. After the
critical adverse effect of roughness on of the sensitivity was found, the necessity
for airfoils specially designed for wind turbine blades arose. The U.S. National
Research Energy Laboratory (NREL) developed an airfoil series for the stall-
regulated, variable-pitch control wind turbine in 1987. The SERI airfoils [15] were
included in this series. Airfoils with low sensitivity to roughness, Gurney flaps and
trailing edge control were developed by the team at the Technical University of
Delft [16]. Airfoils with higher aerodynamic efficiency and a slender blade shape
were produced by the Risø group [17]. The tip region of the airfoil was numerically
22
optimized by Grasso [18]. High aerodynamic effectiveness, insensitivity to the

roughness effect, structural stability, and moderate stall generation were found to
be the factors necessary for airfoils, especially for wind turbine blades.
For an airfoil design which contributes to a high and stable performance of wind
turbines, the codes developed by Eppler and Somers in the 1980s, XFOIL, started
to be used [19]. The stall region prediction accuracy of XFOIL was increased by
RFOIL, developed in 2003 by Timer and van Rooij of the TUDelft team. These were
important developments in designing airfoils, especially in the operating range of
wind turbines [20].
As mentioned above, higher aerodynamic efficiency, insensitivity to the
roughness effect, structural stability and smooth post-stall exhibition, etc, are
required for efficient wind turbine airfoil design. To satisfy these requirements,
this study selected boundary layer control of wind turbine airfoils, inspired by the
boundary layer manipulation of airplane airfoils by Eastman Jacob [13].
Figure 4. Windmill of John Smeaton [6, 7]
23
Figure 5. Bird wing inspiration to Otto Lilienthal [8]
Figure 6. Airfoil families [12]
24
1.3 Numerical Methods

Codes for wind turbines
The numerical codes for wind turbines are used for the evaluation, prediction,
and specification of the performance and design of the turbines [21]. The
atmospheric conditions, aerodynamic forces on the wind turbine structure,
mechanical component dynamics, and the conversion of different parameters can
be modelled by the codes [22, 23, 24]. The results from the model codes have been
validated and verified for reliability by different researchers [25, 26, 27].
For the inflow and turbulent wind model, the turbulent intensity, shear stress,
mean hub height, wind speed, and various statistical values in the atmospheric
environment are necessary as input for the description of the turbulent flow field
and wind speed across the rotor. The values obtained from the model are used to
determine the aerodynamic loads on the wind turbine structure in aerodynamic
design codes [23]. The loads on the whole system are also generated from the
modelled structural dynamics, the control system. The dynamic responses are put
into the fatigue life model codes, which improves the wind turbine design in
accordance with the acceptance criteria [24]. The codes are actively interfaced
with each other as shown in Figure 7 [21].
This research uses various codes in different programs. Among many available
codes to estimate the wind turbine performance, this research utilizes the codes
which are as free as possible to lower the research costs. The airfoils are analysed
by the codes in the software XFOIL, which uses the analysis type of the viscous-
inviscid 2D panel method [19]. The software RFOIL, which is an upgraded version
of XFOIL with added terms in the equations for 3D description, are additionally
attached after the results from XFOIL for the added insurance of the assumptions
in the range of high angle of attack [20].
The resulting polar values are put into the Montgomerie and Viterna 360° polar
extrapolation [28]. The steady Blade Element Momentum (BEM) simulation of the
QBEM module is the next step for blade and turbine designs in the software QBlade
[29] based on the polar results of the previous steps. The 3D correction laws [30]
25
were also applied for considering additional effects on rotational performance

with an optimized airfoil compared with the reference airfoil.
Figure 7. Computer codes used in wind turbine design [21]
Codes for 3D rotation

The first consideration of the 3D rotational effect on the prediction of wind
turbine performance is from the work of Himmelskamp [34], which showed a
higher lift coefficient of the fan in the rotation. The higher lift coefficients were
also found in the experiments of Ronsten and Bruining [35, 36]. A prediction model
of 3D rotation with the Navier-Stokes equation was proposed by Hansen [37]. The
Navier-Stokes equation was developed into the quasi-3D equation, which includes
the viscous-inviscid interaction, by Snel [38, 39]. The quasi-3D models were
validated by Soerensen and Shen [40,41].
The rotational viscous influence on wind turbine blades was investigated
through the quasi-3D Navier-Stokes equation [42]. It was derived from the
variables of the Navier-Stokes equation written in cylindrical coordinates of the
rotating frame of reference [43,44]. The derived equations, which are the
26
continuity equation and the momentum equations for the peripheral, radial and
axial directions, were integrated along the radial direction with some assumptions,
which were checked by the fully 3D Navier-Stokes equations [45]. The model
indicated that the local chord and radius ratio and the twist angle of the blades
were related to the 3D rotational effects. Furthermore, Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD) studies for 3D rotational effects on wind turbine performance
were carried out by Duque [46], Le Pape, and Lecanu [47], Johansen [48] and
Bangga [49]. The numerical simulations were compared with the experimental
data for validation [70], Figure 8.
The physics of 3D rotation of the wind turbine is summarized as follows. The
hub parts of blades are the initiation point for the rotational effect of the complex
rotating flow [50]. At a high angle of attack under post-stall conditions [51], the
flow on the hub parts has more enhanced rotational characteristics. The secondary
flow is generated from the root section of the blade and the centrifugal force
moves the separated flow towards the middle section of the blade with developing
flow in the radial direction to become the radial flow component [42]. The inertial
forces of rotation, or Coriolis force, work to generate the flow near to the blade
walls to delay the stall effect during the rotating motion [42,52].
The Coriolis force was the main element for reducing the separation, rather than
the influence of centrifugal pumping on separation reduction according to
conventional expectations [42,53].
Figure 8. The wake generated by 3D rotation of the NREL Phase VI wind turbine [70]
27
Codes for airfoil optimization

The purpose of optimization is to determine the most efficient solutions among
alternatives in given problems. Although the optimization methods can be
variously categorized, the non-gradient and gradient optimizations are mentioned
as two large subdivisions based on the gradient of the objective functions [54,55].
The usage of optimization methods has increased in recent decades for solving
problems in wind turbine performance. Gradient-based and non-gradient based
optimization and meta-heuristic methods such as the Genetic Algorithm and
Particle Swarm Optimization are the major optimization methods in this respect
[56].
The gradient optimization method is used to find the local minimum of the
function needs. The related equations are to be differentiable and the calculation
processes for the solutions are faster than in the non-gradient cases, which causes
low robustness [57]. However, the disadvantage of convergence during the
processes requires adjustment of the design parameter. For instance, Sequential
Linear Programming (SPL) was used for better optimization convergence in site-
specific wind turbine design [58]. The Sequential Quadratic Programming (SQP)
based optimizer was also utilized in a multidisciplinary design feasible (MDF)
process for the end unit cost reduction of electricity for a specific location [59].
Central differencing and a multi-start approach for improving the convergence
accuracy of the algorithm were adopted in studies to understand the cases which
require specific objectives and constraints [60]. They have been used for the
improvement of wind turbine design with consideration of different aspects. Liao
searched for the optimum solution of the minimum blade mass for reducing cost
production through an improved PSO algorithm [62]. Chen combined finite
element analysis and the particle swarm algorithm for optimizing the composite
structures of wind turbine blades [63].
On the other hand, non-gradient optimization algorithms can be run without the
differentiable equations. The design space of the problem is searched for the
optimal values within the global unit. Particle Swam Optimization (PSO) is one of
the major non-gradient optimization algorithms for wind turbine design solutions
[61].
28
The Genetic Algorithm (GA) is another important non-gradient optimization

method in wind turbine design. The fitness level of the candidate solution can be
calculated for many different sorts of problems, which is also used for finding new
designs of wind turbine airfoil shapes. The starting point of the algorithm is the
population unit, which consists of different solution individuals. It is a probabilistic
operation, rather than deterministic, which is advantageous in searching for global
solutions [66]. Diveux utilized the GA in grid-connected wind turbine system
optimization with a coupled components system in a non-linear way [64]. The GA
was also used for solving the discrete continuous multi-objective formulations in
wind turbine blade optimization by Jureczko [65]. The accuracy of the GA was
increased by the extended compact genetic algorithm (ECGA), designed by Liu for
reducing the population size and function evaluations [66]. Another case of the GA
hybridized with an inverse design method to deduce the design parameters of a
wind turbine for maximizing annual energy production was reported by Selig and
Coverstone-Carroll [67].
Although the GA has been used in different fields of wind turbine design as
outlined above and reported in the literature [68], airfoil optimization with
consideration of the boundary layer, especially the laminar boundary layer region,
has not considered much attention, to the best of the author’s knowledge. It is
because of the previously stressed limit of the laminarization on airfoils in airplane
blades [69]. The possibility and the validity of boundary layer control by the airfoil
design through shaping by GA optimization will be discussed in the following
sections.
CFD Simulation
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) realizes the calculation and visualization
of the flow fields around the wind turbine system. A deeper understanding of the
flow phenomena and the cost-saving of experiments are possible through CFD
calculations [71]. The physical model of the flow represents the flow effects more
accurately than the Blade Element Momentum (BEM) method. For example, the
29
results of aerodynamic simulations show the force distribution [72], flow in a

larger unit such as a wind farm [73], acoustic effect improvements [74], etc.
The backbone equations of the CFD calculations are the Euler equations of
motion for inviscid flow and the Navier-Stokes equations of motion for viscous
flow. The time-step resolved simulations perform unsteady process investigations
[71]. Any section of the flow volume, especially at a location where access to
measurements is difficult, can be suitably chosen for visualization by the CFD
method. If reasonable boundary conditions, an acceptable period of computing
time, and additional efforts to include intense modelling on stalling are considered
properly for steady and unsteady cases, the simulation results can be close to
reality [75, 76].
30
1.4 Motivation
This study proposes a way to increase the aerodynamic performance of HAWT
through airfoil optimization with the objective of a higher Gliding Ratio number
and the larger region of the laminar boundary layer. The Genetic Algorithm is used
for the airfoil design. The BEM and 3D rotation augmentation corrections are used
for the designed wind turbine power production. The difference of the fluid flow
over the changed airfoil shape is visualized by the CFD, OpenFoam. The question of
the aerodynamic advantage of laminar boundary layer expansion by the shape
change of the blade airfoil in a 3D rotating turbine is answered.
Recently, airfoil design history from airplane wings to wind turbine blades
reached a stagnation point, especially the design considering the laminar boundary
layer, based on the author’s literature review. Although laminar boundary layer
enlargement had been tried for the airfoils of aeronautic wings, research on the
airfoils of wind turbine blades for laminar layer expansion is rare. This is due to
the previous results, which question the limits of the laminar layer found in
airplane airfoils. Furthermore, atmospheric turbulence is usually mentioned as
destroying the extended laminar boundary layer of an airfoil in a 3D rotating wind
turbine. This makes research on the laminar boundary layer in wind turbine blades
a non-attractive topic.
Despite the previously mentioned research trend, this study focuses on
optimizing wind turbine airfoils for a larger laminar boundary layer for higher
aerodynamic performance. This reversed direction of study is based on the
serendipitous example of Eastman Jacobs, who successfully introduced the laminar
airfoil in supersonic aeronautic applications.
Moreover, the relationship between the physics of 3D rotational aerodynamics
performance and the boundary layer of the airfoils in wind turbines is investigated.
This physical connection is hypothesized as the reason behind the advantage of the
laminar boundary layer enlargement around the airfoil of wind turbine blades. It
also tries to compensate for the lack of knowledge about the laminar boundary
layer with consideration of 3D rotation augmentation in wind turbines. The results
from the 3D calculations, which provide a more precise prediction than 2D polar
31
codes such as BEM, suggest the possible future role of unrevealed physical
knowledge about the interaction between the specifically shaped airfoil and
rotational augmentation.
To provide greater accessibility to these physical questions for many readers,
author-coded algorithms and cost-free software such as the XFOIL, RFOIL, 3D
correction codes, OpenFoam, Qblade are used.
Chapter 2 Selected Theoretical Aspects explains the relevant theories from the
airfoil to the performance of wind turbines. Chapter 3, Methods Employed,
explains the detailed procedure used to get the results presented in this study.
Chapter 4, Results and Discussion, illustrates and interprets the results. Chapter 5
describes the conclusion and outlook for compensating the limit of this work
connected to further work. References are listed in Chapter 6, followed by the
Appendices in Chapter 7.
32
Chapter 2: Selected theoretical aspects
2 SELECTED THEORETICAL
ASPECTS
2.1 Wind Turbine Airfoil

2.1.1 Airfoil design
Wind turbine airfoils should be designed with consideration of structural and
aerodynamic aspects, Figure 9. When the blades are divided into root, middle, and
tip parts, structural stability is mainly required for the root part, whereas
aerodynamic considerations are dominant for the tip part [14, 15].
For aerodynamic efficiency, the ratio of lift and drag coefficients or Glide Ratio
(GR) should be as high as possible for good turbine performance with a low
sensitivity effect [21]. Moreover, the airfoil should be designed with consideration
of the stall situation [20, 39]. As the stall can be abrupt and undesirable vibrations
can be induced on the blade, the transition and separation of the airfoil should be
designed to move gradually when the angle of attack increases [50]. The angle of
attack can change abruptly in the case of wind gusts, so the airfoil can be in the
stall or pre-stall zone [139, 140]. Therefore, stable performance at an off-design
angle of attack is required to be maintained [21].
Considering structural stability, appropriate thickness of the airfoil and the
chord-wise location of the maximum thickness should be distributed along the
blades about the necessary structural parameters such as blade strength and
stiffness [162].
With respect to the moment coefficient, small values are desired for reduced
control force. The airfoil types along the blade span-wise direction should be
distributed to have similar values of the moment coefficient for the prevention of
irregular performance of the wind turbine rotor [163, 164]. This supports the
33
reason for the trend in wind turbine airfoil development as the series of airfoils
family [18]. The sensitivity of the airfoil to roughness can be controlled by laminar
flow extension for the efficiency of an airfoil in clean conditions [165].
Figure 9. Airfoil for wind turbine
2.1.2 Fluid flow over an airfoil

Aerodynamics
Understanding the flow around the airfoil is necessary for the design of the
airfoil with the desired objectives. The airflow around the airfoil generates the
forces on the body. According to the direction of the velocity of the flow, the lift and
drag forces are determined. The lift force is perpendicular to the velocity direction
whereas the drag is parallel to it.
In general, a minimum pressure point is close to the leading edge of the airfoil
upper surface. When the pressure decreases from the leading edge to the
minimum pressure point, the pressure distribution is called a favourable pressure
gradient. On the other hand, from the minimum point to the trailing edge of the
airfoil, the distribution becomes the adverse pressure gradient. When the flow
loses its momentum to overcome this increasing pressure region, the flow is
separated.
The equation (1) is used to define the pressure distribution around the airfoil.
The local pressure is 𝑝, the free stream static pressure is 𝑝∞ , and the free stream
dynamic pressure is 𝑞∞ .
34
𝒑 − 𝒑∞
𝑪𝒑 =
𝒒∞ (1)
To solve the fluid motion around an airfoil in 2D, the two components of a
coordinate system are needed. The normal velocity is the y-axis and the tangential
velocity is the x-axis. The velocity component of the span-wise direction, the z-axis,
is equal to be zero. The motion of fluid over an airfoil can also be described by the
Navier-Stokes equations [166].
The pressure distributions on the upper and lower sides of airfoils are calculated
through the velocities over the airfoil. Based on the pressure distribution, the net
force exerted on the airfoil from the airflow can be found. The net force vector has
two component vectors, one is perpendicular to the airfoil chord line and the other
is parallel to it. As mentioned in the first paragraph, the lift and drag force vector
can be found by decomposing the net force vector of the airfoil with the reference
direction of the flow velocity around the airfoil.
The free stream wind velocity is denoted as 𝑉∞ . The L is the lifting force and the
force parallel to 𝑉∞ is called the drag force, D. The lift and drag coefficients are
calculated with the lift and drag force divided by the dynamic force when the 𝜌 is
the air density and 𝑐 is the chord length of an airfoil [21], Figure 10.
𝑳
𝑪𝑳 = (2)
𝟏 𝟐
𝟐 𝝆𝑽∞ 𝒄
𝑫
𝑪𝒅 = (3)
𝟏 𝟐
𝟐 𝝆𝑽∞ 𝒄
The parameter α is the angle of attack (Alpha), the angle between the chord-line
and free fluid stream 𝑉∞ . The Reynolds number based on chord length c, flow speed
𝑐𝑉
and kinematic viscosity 𝜈 of flow is 𝑅𝑒 = .
𝜈
The ratio between the flow speed V and the speed of sound a is called the Mach
𝑉
number, 𝑀𝑎 = . The coefficients for lift, drag, and moment, 𝐶𝐿 , 𝐶𝐷 and 𝐶𝑚 ,
𝑎
respectively, are related to the characteristics of 𝛼, 𝑅𝑒 and 𝑀𝑎 [21].
35
Figure 10. Airfoil parameters for aerodynamics [77]
Boundary layer
Dissimilar to the bulk flow around the airfoil where the airflow isn’t influenced
by the viscous forces close to the surface of the airfoil, there is the thin layer close
to the wall exists. The boundary layer is the thin flow region near to the wall
region, where the viscous effect is dominant. The overall fluid flow at high
Reynolds number can be divided into the bulk of the flow region, where the
viscosity can be neglected, and the thin boundary layer where the viscosity needs
to be considered [167].
Inside the boundary layer, the flow can be divided into two parts, the laminar
and turbulent regions. The fluid flow inside the boundary layer is normally laminar
flow at first. Then, due to the viscosity and nonlinear inertial forces, it makes a
transition into turbulent flow, which is chaotic and has higher dynamic force.
Laminar flow has low dynamic force than turbulent flow [167]. The roughness of
surface, free stream flow velocity, and the roughness of the airfoil surface, etc.
influence on the position of the transition. Moreover, the Reynolds number which
makes the boundary layer transition is determined by the geometry and surface
curvature of the airfoil.
At the laminar boundary layer where the velocity of the flow is considerably
lower than at some distance from the wall, the thickness of the layer is increased
36
along the plate or wall geometry [168]. The distance of the boundary layer is
arbitrarily taken as the point where the velocity reaches a certain percentage of
the outer velocity, for example, 99%. Through the equilibrium between the inertial
forces and the friction forces, the boundary layer thickness can be estimated [169].
For a plate of length x, with velocity of the outer flow 𝑈∞ , dynamic viscosity 𝜇,
kinematic viscosity 𝜈, and density of water 𝜚, the solution for the boundary layer
thickness δ is as follows [167]:
𝝁𝒙 𝝂𝒙
𝛅~√ =√ (4)
𝝔𝑼∞ 𝑼∞
The boundary layer thickness can be also estimated through the concept of the
displacement thickness, which is the thickness of the outer flow displaced by the
boundary layer. The displacement thickness 𝛿1 is expressed as
𝐔𝜹𝟏 (𝒙) = ∫ (𝐔 − 𝐮)𝐝𝐲 (5)

𝐲=𝟎
Where 𝑈 is the velocity on the outer edge of the boundary layer at position x.
The wall shear stress 𝜏𝑤 and the entire friction drag of the boundary layer region
can be calculated from the thickness value, δ. The wall shear stress is inversely
proportional to the boundary layer thickness. Therefore, the thinner the boundary
layer thickness, the higher is the wall shear stress [167].
The entire friction drag can be determined by integration of the wall shear stress
at position x. Therefore, reduction of the drag is achievable by manipulation of the
stress, friction, in the near-wall region [168].
The friction drag D of a plate wetted on the side with breadth b and length l is
𝒍
𝑫 = 𝒃 ∫ 𝛕𝐰 (𝐱)𝐝𝐱 (6)
𝟎
37
The skin friction drag is the friction between the drag between the fluid and the
surface and comes from the friction of the fluid against the skin of the object
through which fluid is moving. It can be thought of as the interaction between the
fluid and the skin of the body and is related to the area of the surface contacted by
the fluid. The skin friction coefficient is calculated from the wall shear stress and
the free-stream dynamic pressure according to the following equation, which is
valid in the laminar boundary layer region [167, 168]:
𝝉𝒘 (𝒙) 𝟎. 𝟔𝟔𝟒 𝒍
𝒄𝒇 = 𝝔 = √ (7)
𝑼 𝟐
∞ √𝑹𝒆 𝒙
𝟐
The boundary layer changes into a turbulent region from a laminar region at the
so-called ‘critical point’, x = 𝑥𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 . The critical Reynolds number which contains
the information on the fluid at the transition point is
𝑼𝒙
𝑹𝒆𝒙𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒕 = ( ) (8)
𝒗 𝒄𝒓𝒊𝒕
Although the transition from a laminar to a turbulent regime takes a finite length
within the boundary layer region, the transition point is assumed to be a certain
point. The freedom of the boundary layer from the perturbation of outer flow
influences the numerical value of 𝑅𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡 [167].
Investigations on the laminar-turbulent transition in the boundary layer were
first carried out by Van der Hegge Zijnen [170]. The great increase in the boundary
layer thickness and wall shear stress are most noticeable in the transition region
[167].
At the turbulent boundary layer, the Reynolds number increases with the slowly
decreasing skin-friction and drag coefficients. In this region, the viscous sublayer is
the characteristic regime only in the turbulent regime. The random fluctuating
motion and clear forces of friction make the turbulent boundary layer free from
the influence of viscosity, which impacts on the laminar boundary layer [167, 171].
38
Boundary layer control

It is possible to manipulate the boundary layer around the airfoil by the design
of the geometry which causes the different distribution of the viscous dominant
flow region. The methods for altering the boundary layer are generally called
boundary layer control. Transition point control for increasing the laminar layer
causes a reduction in the skin friction whereas the separation control is to prevent
the separation to reduce the pressure drag [172].
Depending on the requirements of the controller, the methods can be
categorized into passive and active control methods. The uniform blowing, suction,
distributed roughness and vortex generators belong to passive methods. The
synthetic jets, oscillatory blowing and suction, and the heating wall belong to
active methods [173].
For example, the boundary layer suction of an airfoil in an active way stabilizes
the laminar region and postpones the turbulent part. A higher maximum lift
coefficient is acquired through postponed turbulent boundary layer separation.
The general growth of the boundary layer is also suppressed, and the boundary
layer remains attached to the surface, preventing separated flow [167, 173].
Likewise, when the transition of the boundary layer is postponed, the laminar
boundary layer can be enlarged and stabilized. The instability of the laminar region
is decreased and the wave which causes the transition from the laminar to the
turbulent boundary layer, which is called the Tollmien-Schlichting wave is
prevented [174]. Due to the friction and pressure drag reduction from the laminar
layer stabilization, the profile drag can also be decreased [167, 174].
The velocity gradient of laminar flow is smaller than that of turbulent flow. The
shear stress τ is based on the velocity gradient:
𝝏𝒖
𝛕 = 𝛍( ) (9)
𝝏𝒚
The friction drags and the skin-friction coefficient including the τ element are
smaller in the laminar boundary layer region [167].
39
The thickness of the laminar layer is also smaller than that with turbulent flow.
This thickness difference leads to a larger resisting force from the greater
displacement in the turbulent region. The resisting force leads to the pressure
drag, which is largely found in the turbulent region. Therefore, the smaller
thickness of the laminar boundary layer has a smaller pressure drag than for
turbulent flow [167, 175].
For a more stabilized laminar region and postponed transition of the boundary
layer at the airfoil surface, manipulation of the geometry of the airfoil is possible.
Boundary layer control by changing the leading edge shape was carried out by
some researchers [176], and the friction and boundary layer pressure distributions
are influenced by the surface shape of the airfoil [167]. This can represent a
passive way of boundary layer control, as the controller is not needed and physical
limitations in the method exist [173]. The enlarged laminar boundary layer length
with a delayed transition point causes changes in the nature of the disturbances
and stability of the laminar boundary layer in a positive direction, which decreases
the general drag on the boundary layer. The pressure gradients of the flow over
the surface are also controlled by airfoil shaping as it is connected to the stability
of the laminar boundary layer and changes the thickness of the boundary layer due
to the changed shape of the geometry [167, 176,178].
Boundary layer separation

The fluid particles in the boundary layer are affected by the pressure
distribution at the outer flow. The strong friction forces interrupt the fluid
particles to overcome the increased pressure at a certain part of the geometry
[168]. However, when the pressure distribution exposed on the boundary layer is
very strong so as particles are unable to move along the direction of fluid flow, the
movement of particles is directed to the opposite side of the fluid flow. This fluid
flow situation with changed direction is called separation [77, 167, 177].
When the separation occurs with adequately increased pressure, the point of
separation can be estimated from the value of the wall shear stress, 𝜏𝑤 . As the
40
velocity gradient perpendicular to the wall becomes zero at the separation point,
the wall shear stress disappears [167, 168]:
𝝏𝒖
𝝉𝒘 = 𝝁( ) =𝟎 (10)
𝝏𝒚 𝒘
The backflow near the wall causes an increased thickness and strength of the
boundary layer. Furthermore, the mass of the boundary layer is moved towards
the outer fluid flow. Unless high momentum is put into the separated flow to
overcome the exerted adverse pressure gradient, the separated flow is maintained
[167]. Under this adverse pressure gradient, the laminar boundary layer region
separates from the surface, then it becomes transitional. When the separated layer
reattaches on the surface again, it forms a Laminar Separation Bubble (LSB) [179].
It is formed after the suction peak and the flow becomes turbulent after the
reattached region. As the turbulent boundary region with increased momentum
makes the flow attached before it reaches the trailing edge.
The LSB structure has mainly two different sections. The first section consists of
relatively slow circulatory flow with bubble formation. The second section has the
free shear layer and the separated shear layer has the transition point made by the
magnified disturbances generated in the unstable laminar layer area [181]. The
momentum transportation from the mixing dynamics makes the flow reattach on
Figure 11. Laminar Separation Bubble (LSB) structure [180]
41
the surface, Figure 11. The flow separation, transition, and reattachment are found
in the laminar separation bubbles [180].
From experimental data, the variables that influence the physical dimensions of
the separation bubble found to be Reynolds number, external disturbances and the
angle of attack [181]. The experiment results of Diwan and Ramesh showed that
the length and height of the bubble structure became larger as the flow velocity
increased. The height change was greater than the length change [182]. The
structure of the bubble also relied on the Reynolds number of the separated
boundary shear layer. The structure also depended on the parameters from the
pressure distribution in the region of the separation bubbles. The low-speed
velocity with low Reynolds number results in the longer laminar separation bubble
whereas the high-speed velocity with high Reynolds number causes the shorter
separation bubble [180, 183].
Airfoil boundary layer

In the case of fluid flow around a shaped body such as an airfoil, additional
pressure forces on the geometry occur. From the leading edge of the airfoil surface,
a laminar boundary layer is formed, and the laminar-turbulent transition region is
developed after the critical point and the region after the transition region
becomes turbulent. A sudden large change in the drag coefficient of the boundary
layer region is found at the laminar-turbulent transition as a noticeable
characteristic, Figure 12. It was first mentioned by Eiffel, according to Chanetz
[189].
Figure 12. Airfoil boundary layer and separation [167]
42
The following three characteristics found in the general boundary layer over the
plate can also be valid over the boundary layer on an airfoil. First, the boundary
layer thickness δ(𝑥) increases when the wall shear stress 𝜏𝑊 decreases. Second,
the turbulent boundary layer thickness increase downstream is larger than that for
the laminar boundary layer. Third, the pressure distribution of the outer flow is
important in the formation of the boundary layer [167, 184].
The inviscid outer flow increases the pressure distribution on the outer edge of
the boundary layer developed along the surface of the geometry and the pressure
imposed on the boundary layer by the outer flow depends on the position of the
airfoil surface [167, 168]. The airfoil, which is shaped for the larger laminar
boundary layer region at a certain angle of attack, causes a different pressure
distribution on the surface from the outer flow. This leads to smaller drag
compared with the non-shaped geometry [10, 167].
The pressure in the outer flow critically influences the position of the laminar-
turbulence transition. In the area of the airfoil nose where the pressure is minimal,
the boundary layer is laminar and the region with rising pressure induces a change
to the turbulent from the laminar region. The energizing momentum in the flow on
the turbulent boundary layer is larger than that for the laminar boundary layer
[167, 168, 184].
The upper side of the airfoil shows a more dramatic change in pressure than the
bottom side, hence, the possibility of separation is high at the upper part of
geometry [167]. In the non-separated flow situation, the lift-producing motion is
made from the outer flow. When the flow is separated, the lift-producing flow is
destroyed due to the greatly increased drag from the separation. Prevention of
separation is necessary to reduce the increased drag and maintain the lift-
producing flow motion [177, 178].
The angle of attack of inflow on the airfoil is also related to the separation
development [5, 167, 168]. At a low angle of attack, the boundary layer region of
flow over the airfoil is attached to the airfoil surface. The lift coefficient is
increased as the angle of attack increases due to the lift-producing force from the
pressure difference between the upper and the bottom surfaces of the airfoil. After
the maximum lift coefficient is generated, the boundary layer is detached because
43
the fluid particles cannot overcome the pressure gradient at the higher angle of
attack [185]. The detached boundary layer generates turbulence and separation,
which breaks the general pressure difference [186]. The drag increases during this
flow separation and a stall situation [167, 168].
2.1.3 Genetic algorithm optimization

Evolutionary computation
To shape the airfoil with the most desirable aerodynamics around the geometry,
the Genetic Algorithm optimization is used in this study. This optimization belongs
to evolutionary computation.
The problems of uncertainty, randomness, and non-linear interactions can be
solved by the concept of natural selection [78], through which biological
individuals survive [56].
When organisms live together in a certain ecosystem, the individuals compete
for limited resources within a given time. For individuals that are more fitted to the
demands of their environment, the possibility of their survival is higher than for
others who have a lower level of fitness. The organisms with a higher survival
possibility have more offspring than the others with a lower survival probability,
which leads the fittest organism types to survive in that ecosystem more
persistently than the others. In this process, the group with higher fitness and
survival rates is selected according to the requirements of the environment. In a
longer time perspective, the organism groups are thought to evolve into the group
with individuals with a higher fitness for the environmental demands, with
eliminations of the groups of individuals with lower fitness [79].
This principle is imitated by Evolutionary Computation (EC) with application of
biological concepts in an algorithm with the purpose of searching for optimal
solutions in certain scientific or engineering problems [80]. The algorithm is
programmed to move towards the best solution which is available within the
possible individual solutions within a given time. The traditional methods find the
solution with heuristically or randomly when EC selects the possible solution with
44
a population-based selecting process, which shows higher effectiveness and

robustness compared with the traditional methods. The advantages of EC are the
simplicity of its approach to problems, its robust adaptation to changing
circumstances, and its flexibility for application in problem-solving processes in
different fields [56].
When the EC solves the problem, the user chooses the representation scheme to
make the boundary of the set of solutions for the algorithm so as to have a search
space for the solution. The initial population is generated with the composition of
several individual solutions. The individuals in the population are evaluated
separately by a fitness function, which is formulated to estimate the fitness level of
each individual in the population. Based on calculated fitness values [81], superior
individuals with higher fitness levels are chosen to be parents. The new
individuals, as offspring, are generated from the parents using reproduction
operators. After the evaluation of offspring fitness values, the survivors are
selected to form a new population, replacing the old population. The steps are
iteratively repeated until the solution and process meet the termination criteria.
The selection method sets the number of parents, offspring, and individuals to
survive for elaborating the evaluation steps in the algorithm [56, 78, 80].
Examples of EC are Ant colony optimization, Artificial immune system,
Evolutionary algorithm, Particle swarm optimization, Swarm intelligence, and
Genetic Algorithm. Among these, the Genetic Algorithm is used in this study as this
method is useful for airfoil shapes to be placed in a gene format [187].
Genetic algorithm
Unlike the gradient method which searches the local minimum of the function,
the non-gradient method finds the global minimum with the stochastic methods.
Because Genetic Algorithm is within the non-gradient method, it converges its final
values among the population, rather than a single point [54, 55]. As the objective of
this study is to find the proper shape of the airfoil, the Genetic Algorithm is chosen
also to have the possible solution designs as the population.
45
The algorithm set begins with the concept of the gene. The genes in biological
organisms are structurally independent of other genes [82], Figure 13. A fixed-
length bit string is used as the representation in a traditional genetic algorithm
when the string is evaluated as the combination of elements with structural
characteristics of the solution with no interactions with other strings [56].
The strings are reproduced by several reproduction operators. The most
frequently used operators are crossover and mutation [83]. The crossover uses
two strings as parents and swap them to form a new string with sequences from
parent springs. Through the mutation operator, a single bit in the string is flipped
to make new offspring strings. The parents are selected probabilistically according
to their fitness level regarding the environment and the generated offspring
replaces the parents [84].
Figure 13. Allele concept of particulate genes of Mendel [62]
The particulate gene concept of Mendel needs to be explained for a deeper

understanding of the Genetic Algorithm. The biological reproduction and genetic
foundation of phenotypes were thought to be a process like liquid blending before
Mendel’s theory of particulate genes [85]. It replaces the defective and ambiguous
concept of inheritance blending when it comes to sexual reproduction. Mendel
suggested the term “allele”, the variant form of a given gene as the unit for specific
phenotype characteristics, of the gene rather than liquid concept [86], Figure 10.
Based on a particulate gene unit, natural selection changes the proportion of
alleles in a population with advantageous mutation for fixing the population to
have a higher survival rate with proper alleles [81]. The particulate nature of genes
46
also provides the conceptual foundation for the prediction of the improvement of
population phenotypes in biological reproduction processes to be seen as
evolution over generations [83]. The genetic makeup of new individuals in a
reproducing population is probabilistically selected results from the allele
composition of the previous generation [86]. Therefore, the particulate genes with
a different allele composition cause the stochasticity of generational development
in reproduction [87]. To provide a detailed biological background, following
section is provided.
Biological background
All morphological information is included in genes settled in chromosomes [88].
The chromosomes consist of Deoxyribo Nucleic Acid (DNA), Figure 14. The
chromosomes are divided into genes, which define the characteristics of species.
The alleles in genes are units to indicate a particular property of individuals. The
collection of all available alleles in genes is called the gene pool and decides the
probable variations for future generations. The gene pool size controls the degree
of variety of populations. The complete set of genes in an individual is termed the
genome [89].
Figure 14. Gene structure from chromosome and cell [63]
Although genes can be saved in different chromosomes in real biology, the

Genetic Algorithm simplifies the concepts so that all genes are in the same
chromosome to make the genome and chromosome have the same meaning [56].
47
The total combination of genes is known as the genotype and the phenotype
depicts the decoded result of the genotype as a physical representation. The
selection of inheritance is based on phenotype and the unit of reproduction deals
with genotype recombination [90]. In complex biological species, the
chromosomes are usually settled with their copies to be diploid to allow a broader
diversity of alleles. On the other hand, a haploid consists of only one set of genes in
the chromosomes. The GA adopts the haploid system convenience in
implementation for computation [56, 91].
Parameterization
The first step in the design of a wind turbine airfoil is the mathematical
description of the airfoil structure, parameterization. Among various
parameterization methods for describing the shapes of airfoils, the B-spline is used
in this study [92], because of its broader application compared with other methods
such as orthogonal shape functions, linear combinations or the other spline
functions [93].
The spline functions are curves including a piecewise polynomial approximation
to make additional smoothness possible. Among various types of functions,
polynomial functions are mostly used in spline functions. The Joukowski
transformation, Hicks-Henne shape functions, splines, B-splines, non-uniform
rational B-splines, etc, are used for airfoil parameterization [97]. The B-spline is
shaped to curve closely to the given points, more smoothly than the other splines
[92, 93, 97].
The usefulness of the B-spline for describing airfoils can be appreciated from the
following examples. Fanjoy and Crossle used the B-spline with 21 design variables
in a method to describe any airfoils [94]. Viccini and Quagliarella also used the B-
spline for airfoil parameterization in a GA scheme [95]. Burgreen and Baysal made
use of B-spline series control points [96].
48
A spline function consists of connected polynomial pieces of specific smoothness

and conditions. When function F is a spline of degree 1 with the following three
conditions:
(1) The domain of F is in the interval [𝑎, 𝑏]

(2) F is continuous on [𝑎, 𝑏]
(3) The domain is partitioned as [𝑎 = 𝑡0 < 𝑡1 < 𝑡2 … < 𝑡𝑛 = 𝑏]
In each interval [𝑡𝑖 , 𝑡𝑖+1 ], F is a linear polynomial.
The B-spline, the basis of all splines, is numerically defined from setting an
infinite set of knots {𝑡𝑖 }:
⋯ < 𝒕−𝟐 < 𝒕−𝟏 < 𝒕𝟎 < 𝒕𝟏 < 𝒕𝟐 < ⋯

{ 𝐥𝐢𝐦 𝒕𝒊 = ∞ = − 𝐥𝐢𝐦𝒕−𝒊 (11)
𝒊→∞ 𝒊→∞
Depending on this set of knots, the B-spline is defined and its definition with
degree 0 is
𝟏 𝒕𝒊 ≤ 𝒙 < 𝒕𝒊+𝟏
𝑩𝟎𝒊 (𝒙) = { (12)
𝟎 𝒐𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒘𝒊𝒔𝒆
Any spline of degree 0, which is continuous from the right and is based on the
defined knots of the 0 degree B-spline, can be described as a linear combination of
the B-spline 𝐵𝑖0. If S corresponds to this case, it can be specified as
𝑺(𝒙) = 𝒃𝒊 , 𝐢𝐟 𝒕𝒊 ≤ 𝒙 < 𝒕𝒊+𝟏 (13)
Then S can be written as
𝑺(𝒙) = 𝒃𝒊 ∑∞ 𝟎
𝒊=−∞ 𝑩𝒊 (𝒙) (14)
49
If 𝐵𝑖0 (𝑥) is set as a starting point, all the higher-degree B-splines can be
generated by recursive definition,
𝒙 − 𝒕𝒊 𝒕𝒊+𝒌+𝟏 − 𝒙
𝑩𝒌𝒊 (𝒙) = ( ) 𝑩𝒌−𝟏
𝒊 (𝒙) + ( ) 𝑩𝒌−𝟏 (𝒙) (𝒌 ≥ 𝟏) (15)
𝒕𝒊+𝒌 − 𝒕𝒊 𝒕𝒊+𝒌+𝟏 − 𝒕𝒊+𝟏 𝒊+𝟏
Where k = 1, 2, …and i = 0, ±1, ±2. The detailed derivation of B-spline

formulations is given in [92]. An example of B-spline representation is shown in
Figure 15.
Figure 15. Airfoil parameterized by B-spline with 13 control points [98]
50
2.2 CFD Simulation

Governing equation
The fluid flow and related phenomena can be described by partial or differential
equations. This section explains how airfoil flow visualization in this study is done
with the different CFD equations. The partial differential or integro-differential
equations cannot be solved by analytic methods. Therefore, the discretization
method is used to approximate the differential equations by algebraic equation
systems to make the equations solvable by computation [71].
The backbone equations for the CFD calculation are the Euler equations of
inviscid flow and the Navier-Stokes equation [99]. The unsteady process
investigation is done by time-step resolved simulation from CFD.
The Navier-Stokes equation is derived from the continuity equation of mass and
̅ and
momentum conservation. The equations below indicate the velocity vector V
divergence operator ∇ where 𝑢, 𝑣, 𝑤 refer to the velocity at the x, y, z axis,
respectively; 𝑝 refers to the pressure and 𝑓 refers to the friction with the viscous
force, 𝐹𝑣𝑖𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑠 [100].
̅ = 𝒖𝒙
𝐕 ̂ + 𝒗𝒚
̂ + 𝒘𝒛̂ (16)
𝝏(𝝆𝒖) 𝝏𝒑
̅) = −
+ 𝛁 · (𝝆𝒖𝑽 + 𝝆𝒇𝒙 + (𝑭𝒙 )𝒗𝒊𝒔𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒔 (17)
𝝏𝒕 𝝏𝒙
𝝏(𝝆𝒗) 𝝏𝒑
̅) = −
+ 𝛁 · (𝝆𝒗𝑽 + 𝝆𝒇𝒚 + (𝑭𝒚 )𝒗𝒊𝒔𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒔 (18)
𝝏𝒕 𝝏𝒚
𝝏(𝝆𝒘) 𝝏𝒑
̅) = −
+ 𝛁 · (𝝆𝒘𝑽 + 𝝆𝒇𝒛 + (𝑭𝒛 )𝒗𝒊𝒔𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒔 (19)
𝝏𝒕 𝝏𝒛
Euler equations are derived with the condition of a steady-state flow to erase the
time partial derivatives and inviscid flow to eliminate viscous terms to have the
absence of body forces in x, y, z coordinates [100, 101].
𝝏𝒑
̅) = −
𝛁 · (𝝆𝒖𝑽 (20)
𝝏𝒙
51
𝝏𝒑
̅) = −
𝛁 · (𝝆𝒗𝑽 (21)
𝝏𝒚
𝝏𝒑
̅) = −
𝛁 · (𝝆𝒘𝑽 (22)
𝝏𝒛
For the airfoil 2D flow simulation, several methods are possible. The
aerodynamic and aeroelasticity characteristics for flow over an airfoil can be
acquired as constant values by using comparison of codes. The Reynolds-averaged
Navier-Stokes (RANS) equation is used for both compressible and incompressible
flow calculations.
For the turbulent model, the 𝑘 − ω SST model of Menter is frequently used and
transition is modelled with different types of models such as the 𝑒 𝑁 method, 𝑘 − ε
model, 𝑘 − ω SST model coupled with the γ equation LCTM of Menter. The
computation methods for different types of model combinations for higher
accuracy are explained in the reference [102].
Turbulence
To simulate the flow around an airfoil with a turbulent flow model, this study
uses the specific turbulence models. Before explaining the details about the model,
the general concept and the governing equations of a turbulent flow are
introduced in this section.
The turbulent flow was first recognized by Leonardo da Vinci, as seen in his
sketch book [103], and the descriptions of the turbulence were developed by
Boussinesq and Reynolds in the 19th century [104, 105]. The study was continued
by Prandtl, Taylor, Kolmogorov, Chapman, Tobak and Rotta, etc., in the 20th
century [107]. Turbulence modeling which describes the turbulent flow with the
statistical analyses was developed. The models mainly used the average of the
nonlinear Navier-Stokes equations [108, 109].
The Navier-Stokes equation for initiation point of turbulence modeling is
expressed as follows [106]:
52
𝜵·𝑼=𝟎 (23)
𝑼𝒕 + 𝑼 · 𝛁𝑼 = −𝜵𝑷 + 𝝂∆𝑼 + 𝑭𝑩 (24)
Where ∇ and Δ are the gradient and Laplace operator, respectively, 𝑈 indicates
𝜕
the velocity field of the fluid flow, subscript t stands for time differentiation, 𝜕𝑡, P is
the reduced, kinematic pressure and 𝐹𝐵 is the body force term.

For the turbulence expression, the Navier-tokes equation is rearranged with
Reynolds decomposition and body-force term cancellation, where Reynolds
decomposition is [112]
̅ + 𝒖′
𝑼=𝒖 (25)
The time averaging and spatial differentiation in the linear terms are done with
temporal averaging and differentiation of the left-hand side. The following
equation is the RANS equation for turbulence modeling [113]:
̅ 𝟐 + 𝛁 · ̅̅̅̅
𝛁·𝒖 𝒖′𝟐 = −𝛁𝒑
̅ + 𝝂𝚫𝒖
̅ (26)
As the term ∇ · ̅̅̅̅

𝑢′2 does not have an equation for its six independent
components, a “turbulence closure problem” arose; ̅̅̅̅
𝑢′2 is called the Reynolds
stress tensor [114]:
̅̅̅̅
𝒖′𝟐 ̅̅̅̅̅ ̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝒖′𝒗′ 𝒖′𝒘′
̅̅̅̅
𝟐
𝒖′𝒗′ ̅̅̅̅
𝒖′ = ( ̅̅̅̅̅ 𝒗′𝟐 ̅̅̅̅̅̅
𝒗′𝒘′) (27)
𝒖′𝒘′ 𝒗′𝒘′ ̅̅̅̅̅
̅̅̅̅̅̅ ̅̅̅̅̅̅ 𝒘′𝟐
Therefore, the previously described RANS equation can be rewritten as follows:
𝝏 ̅
𝝏𝒑 𝟐
𝝏 ̅̅̅
𝒖 𝝏
𝒖𝒊 ̅̅̅𝒋 = − 𝝏𝒙 + 𝛎 𝝏𝒙 𝝏𝒙𝒊 − 𝝏𝒙 ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
̅̅̅𝒖 𝒖′ 𝒊 𝒖′ 𝒋 , (i=1, 2, 3) (28)
𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝒊 𝒋 𝒋 𝒋
53
The RANS equations are usually used for turbulence flow modeling. The
equations of a certain model are mathematically easier to be solve than the
formulations describing reality. The complex formulation of the turbulence model
is a simplified description of the fluid flow in the reality.
The RANS models are classified in different ways. The number of additional
partial differential equations (PDEs) to be solved, besides the Navier-Stokes
equation, is one of the common standards for differentiation of models. The zero-,
one- and two-equation models are named from this standard. If there are no
additional differential equations to be solved, the model is called “algebraic”. The
opposite case is called the “differential” model.
The Boussinesq hypothesis is used in different types of models by relating the
turbulent shear stress to the mean flow strain rate, based on Newton’s law of
viscosity [117, 118]. The shear stress is proportional to the strain rate with
viscosity as the constant of proportionality according to Newton’s law of viscosity.
This led to the turbulent shear stress being proportional to the mean flow strain
rate [106]:
̅̅̅̅̅ ̅ 𝝏𝒗
𝟏 𝝏𝒖 ̅
𝒖′𝒗′ ~ ( + ) (29)
𝟐 𝝏𝒚 𝝏𝒙
Although the dynamic viscosity 𝜇 of laminar flow is based on the experimental

results, the turbulent flow eddy viscosity 𝜐𝑇 is not supported by empirical results.
The turbulent shear stress with eddy viscosity results in the following hypothesis
[118]:
̅ 𝝏𝒗
𝝏𝒖 ̅
̅̅̅̅̅̅
−𝒖 ′ 𝒗′ = 𝝊 (
𝑻 + ) (30)
𝝏𝒚 𝝏𝒙
With this hypothesis it is a challenge to relate Reynolds stresses, which are

presumed to represent small-scale statistical flow behaviour, to the mean strain
rates and large-scale mean or statistical turbulent flow pattern. The eddy viscosity
𝜐𝑇 cannot be a constant, physical fluid property, and is a changeable parameter in
54
some fluid flow cases [120]. Moreover, the Reynolds stress tensor equations will
be developed with the time-averaging effect and vorticity effect. The RANS
equations are defective due to the aspects of time averaging, Reynolds
decomposition, generic form of the equation, and inequality with the time-
averaged Navier-Stokes equation [113].
The drawbacks of Reynolds decomposition, the absence of interactive small
scales in the RANS equations, the difference between RANS solutions and time-
averaged solutions of the Navier-Stokes equation also show the limitations of the
approach. This necessitates the modification of each model to improve the
accuracy [115, 116].
Among many turbulence models, the Spalart-Allmaras (SA) and 𝑘 − 𝜔 SST
model are used in this study for simulating fluid flow at the moderate and stall
angle of attack respectively. The models are incorporated in OpenFoam and their
accuracy in aerodynamic predictions has been proved. Especially, the advantage of
relative independence of the accuracy from the mesh number makes the SA model
more useful [188, 197].
Spalart-Allmaras (SA) model

The Spalart-Allmaras (SA) model is a one-equation turbulence model with the
advantage of a compromise between algebraic and two-equation models. It
provides sound results for various flow problems with numerical properties [121].
Fine grids are not necessary for the SA model, in contrast to the algebraic models
which demand finer grids for the velocity field gradient [104].
The model is principally a transport equation for the eddy viscosity. The
Reynolds stresses should be determined for the governing equations to be a closed
system. Based on the physical characteristics of turbulent flow, the terms were
assumed to describe diffusion, production and destruction of the turbulence [116].
As the eddy viscosity is a transportable scalar quantity, the following equation was
formulated as the transport equation, where 𝜐̃ is the working variable of the
turbulence model [119, 121]:
55
̃
𝝏𝝊 ̃
𝝏𝝊 𝟏 𝝏 ̃
𝝏𝝊 ̃ 𝝏𝝊
𝝏𝝊 ̃ ̃
𝝊
̃𝒋
+𝒖 = 𝒄𝒃𝟏 𝑺̃ 𝝊
̃+ [ ̃)
(( 𝝊 + 𝝊 ) + 𝒄𝒃𝟐 ] − 𝒄𝒘𝟏 𝒇𝒘 ( )𝟐
𝝏𝒕 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝈 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝒅 (31)
The first term on the right-hand side indicates production. In the model
assumptions, the eddy viscosity is considered as the capability of turbulent flow to
transport momentum. The production term is assumed to increase linearly with
the magnitude of the vorticity.
As the eddy viscosity assumption related to “level of activity” includes the
turbulent energy concept to build the destruction term, the third term on the right-
hand side is the destruction term. The faster-decaying motion in the outer part of
the boundary layer is expressed with the function 𝑓𝑤 [115, 116]. Because the
boundary layer conditions and the terms are incorporated in the model equations,
the SA model is independent of the cell number of the mesh compared to the other
models [197].
𝒌 − 𝝎 SST model
As the SA model has the limit on prediction at the higher angle of attack, the 𝑘 −
𝜔 SST model is used for the simulation at higher angle of attach. Although there are
many difficulties in the prediction of the stall flow at higher angle of attack regime
with different CFD models [198, 199, 200], the validated 𝑘 − 𝜔 SST simulation at
stall angle of attack (Alpha) = 20 ° of airfoil S809 [198] is based on the simulation
of this study.
The Menter 𝑘 − 𝜔 SST model has been upgraded from the previous 𝑘 − 𝜔
model by Wilcox. It is a two-equation eddy-viscosity model. The model applies 𝑘 −
𝜔 formulation in the boundary layer of the fluid and it also makes 𝑘 − 𝜀 model in
the free-stream. The increased accuracy on the prediction of the boundary layer,
adverse pressure gradients, and separating flow are accomplished by this model.
The k is for the turbulent kinetic energy and the omega is the speed of eddy
dissipation.
56
The two equations of the model for the turbulence kinetic energy and the
specific dissipation rate are written in (32) – (33). The closure coefficients and
auxiliary relations are found in [201, 202].
𝝏𝒌 𝝏𝒌 𝝏 𝝏𝒌
+ 𝑼𝒋 = 𝑷𝒌 − 𝜷∗ 𝒌𝝎 + [(𝝂 + 𝝈𝒌 𝝂𝑻 ) ] (32)
𝝏𝒕 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝏𝒙𝒋
𝝏𝝎 𝝏𝝎 𝝏 𝝏𝝎 𝟏 𝝏𝒌 𝝏𝝎
+ 𝑼𝒋 = 𝜶𝑺𝟐 − 𝜷𝝎𝟐 + [(𝝂 + 𝝈𝝎 𝝂𝑻 ) ] + 𝟐(𝟏 − 𝑭𝟏 ) 𝝈𝝎𝟐 (33)
𝝏𝒕 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝏𝒙𝒋 𝝎 𝝏𝒙𝒊 𝝏𝒙𝒊
2.2.1 Wind turbine design theory

Wind turbine power is produced by the interaction between the rotor and the
wind. Although a wind turbine is exposed to the wind with turbulent fluctuations,
the main elements to consider for wind turbine performance derive from the
aerodynamic forces calculated from the mean value of the incoming wind in design
theory [122].
The derivations for prediction of the steady-state wind turbine rotor
performance can be found in the analysis of Betz and Glauert in the 1930s,
considered to be the classical analysis of wind turbines [123]. The theoretical
performance limit is determined by idealized wind turbine rotor analysis. The
simple model of Betz and Glauert determines the power and thrust and the effect
of the rotor performance on the wind field of an idealized wind turbine rotor. The
linear momentum theory, which is the basis of the derivation, is from classical ship
propeller performance prediction [124].
The assumed control volume which surrounds the model wind turbine has the
boundaries of the stream tube and the two cross-sections of the stream tube.
The turbine is considered as an ‘actuator disc’ and pressure in the stream tube
through which the air is flowing is discontinued by the disc with some assumptions
[5]. The force of the wind on the wind turbine is opposite and equal to the net force
57
on the control volume according to the conservation of linear momentum to the

control volume [125], Figure 16.
Figure 16. Actuator disc model of a wind turbine [125]
If ν is the velocity for each position, 𝑣1 for incoming velocity and 𝑣2 for outer
velocity, 𝑝 is pressure, F is thrust force and A is the sectional area of the control
volume, the following reasoning for deduction of the relevant equations is possible.
Based on the conservation of linear momentum with the condition of one-
dimensional, incompressible, steady-state flow, the thrust force is calculated as
𝑭 = 𝒗𝟏 (𝝆𝑨𝝂) - 𝒗𝟑 (𝝆𝑨𝝂) (34)
When
𝒅𝒎
𝒎̇ = = (𝝆𝑨𝒗)𝟏= (𝝆𝑨𝒗)𝟑 (steady-state flow) (35)
𝒅𝒕
𝑭 = 𝑚̇(𝑣1 - 𝑣3 ) (36)
58
Furthermore, the thrust force is also represented as the net force exertion on the
rotor plane expressed with the pressure on the rotor surface area A:
𝑭 = 𝑨𝜟𝒑 (37)
As no work was done on the rotor plane, the Bernoulli equation can be applied
on each surface of the rotor plane where air flow is coming in and out. The
resulting thrust with the Bernoulli equation [126] is
𝟏
𝑭 = 𝟐 𝝆𝑨(𝒗𝟏 𝟐 - 𝒗𝟑 𝟐 ) (38)
Following calculation with equations (32) and (33), and velocity at the rotor
plane can be derived:
𝟏
𝒗 = 𝟐(𝒗𝟏 + 𝒗𝟑 ) (39)
With the axial induction factor 𝑎, introduced to express the relative reduction
rate of the incoming wind velocity, the following deduction for calculation of the
power coefficient is possible, where 𝑃 is the power extracted at the rotor plane and
𝑃𝑤 is the power of blowing wind on wind turbine rotor [5]:
𝒗𝟏 − 𝒗
𝒂= (40)
𝒗𝟏
𝟏 𝟏
𝑷 = 𝑽̇∆𝒑 = 𝑨𝒗 ∆𝒑 = 𝟐 𝝆𝒗(𝒗𝟏 𝟐 - 𝒗𝟑 𝟐 )𝑨 = 𝟐 𝝆𝑨𝒗𝟑𝟏 𝟒𝒂(𝟏 − 𝒂)𝟐 (41)
𝒅𝑬 𝟏 𝒅𝒎 𝟐 𝟏
𝑷𝒘 = = 𝑬̇ = 𝒗 = 𝝆𝑨𝒗𝟑𝟏 (42)
𝒅𝒕 𝟐 𝒅𝒕 𝟏 𝟐
59
2.2.2 Performance prediction

Blade element method (BEM)
The Blade Element Method (BEM) and Free Vortex (FV) are used to calculate the
power production of the designed wind turbine in this study. The BEM model
starts with the Betz design theory.
Betz design theory determines the ideal blade shape of the ‘Betz optimum rotor’
when a =1/3 without wake loss. The angles and velocities are shown in Figure 17.
The rotor design parameters, chord length, and pitch angle used for rotor
optimization are explained in this section.
Here 𝛼(𝑟) is the angle of attack, 𝛽(𝑟) is the sum of tip pitch angle and twist angle,
𝜑(𝑟) is the angle of relative wind to rotor plane, 𝑤 is the relative wind speed, 𝑣 is
the incoming wind speed, 𝑢 is the tip speed (𝜔𝑟), 𝜔 is the angular velocity and
𝐹𝐿 and 𝐹𝐷 indicate lift and drag forces exerted on the blade with 𝐹𝑋 and 𝐹𝑦 as
tangential and normal components of forces. The differential torque from the
tangential force at distance 𝑟 from the rotor center is 𝑑𝑄 when the blade number is
𝐵.
Figure 17. Betz triangle [125]
A parameter with subscript 1 means that it exists far in front of the rotor plane,
whereas the others without a subscript indicate its existence on the rotor plane.
60
𝜔𝑅 𝜔𝑟
The tip speed ratio is 𝜆 = and the local speed ratio is 𝜆(𝑟) = . With the
𝑣1 𝑣1
formulations based on the velocity triangle in Figure 14, the corresponding angles
and forces are following
𝒗 𝟐𝑹
𝝋(𝒓) = 𝐭𝐚𝐧−𝟏 = 𝐭𝐚𝐧−𝟏 (43)
𝒖 𝟑𝝀𝒓
𝜷(𝒓)𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐳 = 𝝋(𝒓) − 𝜶𝒅 (44)
𝟏
𝒅𝑭𝑳 = 𝑪𝑳 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓 (45)
𝟐
𝟏
𝒅𝑭𝑫 = 𝑪𝑫 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓 (46)
𝟐
𝟏
𝒅𝑭𝒙 = 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓(𝑪𝑳 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝝋) − 𝑪𝑫 𝐜𝐨𝐬(𝝋)) (47)
𝟐
𝟏
𝒅𝑭𝒚 = 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓(𝑪𝑳 𝐜𝐨𝐬(𝝋) + 𝑪𝑫 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝝋)) (48)
𝟐
𝒅𝑸 = 𝑩𝒓𝒅𝑭𝒙 (49)
When the Glide Ratio (GR) of the airfoil is large enough, the drag coefficient can
be neglected to make the resultant power element of the blade equal to the
1
element power based on 𝑎 = 3 .
𝟏 𝟏𝟔 𝟏
𝒅𝑷 = 𝑩𝒅𝑭𝒙 r𝝎 = 𝑩 𝟐 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓𝑪𝑳 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝝋)r𝝎 = 𝝆𝑨𝒗𝟑𝟏 𝟐𝝅𝒓𝒅𝒓 (50)
𝟐𝟕 𝟐
Analytic calculation of the chord length from the equation for element rotor
power leads to
𝟏𝟔𝝅𝑹 𝟏
𝒄(𝒓)𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐳 =
𝟗𝑩𝑪𝑳,𝒅 𝒓 𝟒 (51)
𝝀√𝝀𝟐 (𝑹)𝟐 + 𝟗
61
3
Where 𝑣1 = 2 𝑤 sin(𝜑), 𝑢 = 𝑤𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜑) and 𝐶𝐿,𝑑 is the drag coefficient of the design
angle of attack. The formulations are integrated to show the total sum of the rotor,
Figure 18.
Figure 18. Rotor section concept [64]
Lifting Line Theory (LLT) or Free Vortex (FV) method

The Free Vortex (FV) method is another way to calculate the wind turbine
performance This model starts with the concept of a wake, which is the backflow of
the air from the wind turbine. The wake generated by wind turbine performance is
simulated through lift line theory codes in the software Qblade. The code is based
on AMSW codes, using generalized lifting line theory [127], which originates from
the Prandtl lifting line theory [129]. For the case with local aerodynamic
characteristics varying with time and a significant wake effect, the AMSW code is
more precise than commonly used BEM theory codes [128].
The flow field around the blade 3D body is described by the velocity vector 𝑢
⃗,
distribution of sources σ and vortices ω
⃗⃗ . The dimension reduction from volume
integral to surface integral to line integral can be performed for simplification, as
the core concept of the lifting line method [127].
62
All vorticity and source singularities distributed on the figure surface are
gathered into the mean line of the figure and then those are combined into a single
point at the quarter position of the chord. The velocity distribution over the body
⃗ (𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧) and the source term σ is ⃗∇·𝑢
is 𝑢 ⃗⃗ is ⃗∇ × 𝑢
⃗ when the vorticity ω ⃗.
The vortex sheet 𝛾 in lifting surface method is the integral of the vorticity ω
⃗⃗ in
the z direction and the vortex line Γ is the sum of the vortex sheet in the z
direction, Figure 19.
Figure 19. Dimension reduction and flow field simplification of LLT [127]
The bound vortices are located at the quarter position of the chord and at the
trailing edge. In the vortex-line model, the thickness and displacements are not
considered to make source term vanish and only vorticity effects exist. According
to Kelvin’s circulation theorem, vortex tubes cannot have free ends and must be
closed so as to make all vortex lines be seen as part of a closed vortex ring [130].
The total external force 𝐹 on the body, the fluid vorticity 𝜔
⃗ and the lift of vortices
⃗ below are taken from reference [131].
strengths 𝐿
63
⃗ = ∭ 𝝆(𝒖
𝑭 ⃗⃗⃗ )𝒅𝑽
⃗ ×𝝎 (52)
⃗ ×𝒖
⃗⃗⃗ = 𝛁
𝝎 ⃗ (53)
⃗ = 𝝆(𝒖
𝒅𝑳 ⃗ × ⃗𝚪)𝒅𝒍 = 𝝆𝚪(𝒖
⃗ × 𝒅𝒍) (54)
Where 𝑑𝑙 is the vortex line element.

The induced velocity by a volume of vorticity into a vortex line element is given
by the Biot-Savart law [132]. Moreover, the vortex strength Γ of the rings is
calculated from equalization of the supplied aerodynamic lift and vortices strength
lift:
−𝟏 ⃗ × 𝒅𝒍
𝒓
⃗ 𝚪 (𝒙
𝒖 ⃗ 𝒑) = ∫𝚪 (55)
𝟒𝝅 𝒓𝟑
𝐝𝑳𝚪 = 𝝆𝚪√((𝒖 ⃗ 𝟏 )𝟐 + ((𝒖

⃗ 𝒄𝒑 × 𝒅𝒍) · 𝒂 ⃗ 𝟑 )𝟐
⃗ 𝒄𝒑 × 𝒅𝒍) · 𝒂 (56)
Where 𝑥𝑝 is the evaluation point generated by position vectors from the start
and end of the vortex line and r is the position vector length. The vectors 𝑎1 and 𝑎3
indicate unit vectors in the chord-wise and normal directions. The velocity 𝑢
⃗ 𝑐𝑝 is
the total onset velocity at the control point location, 𝑥𝑐𝑝 , including the velocity
vectors of wind, motion and vortex-induced velocity [128].
64
As the initiation step of wake generation, the vorticity is shed from the trailing
edge of the given blade geometry.
Figure 20. Wake geometry prolongation [127]
Then it is flows downstream in the AWSM model with time advancement. The
bound vortices are located at the quarter position of the chord and the trailing
edge of the blade geometry with vortex rings [133], Figure 20.
The vortex lattice is formed with the vortex rings, joined vortex rings in older
vortex rings flowing from the trailing edge of blade airfoil with vortex strength Γ
[134]. The position of the down part of the wake is assigned at each time step by
transportation of the vortex-lattice nodes of the wake [134, 135]:
⃗ =𝒖
𝚫𝒙 ⃗ 𝒘𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝚫𝐭/𝚫𝒙
⃗ =𝒖
⃗ 𝚪 𝚫𝐭 (57)
The wake transportation is done separately with the initiation of wind velocity
and with the induced velocity, [127, 128].
65
2.2.3 Wind turbine control

This section briefly introduces two control modes of the wind turbine. The
control of wind turbine is to maximize and stabilize the power production for a
wide range of wind speeds, using various control strategies [5].
The operating conditions such as cut-in and cut-out wind velocity and excessive
dynamic mechanical loads are considered for effective wind turbine control.
Ultimately, low maintenance costs, safe operation, and long structural stability are
aimed for in control methods [125]. There are different types of control strategy,
having different benefits for each types of wind turbine design and operation.
First, when the power level reaches more than the prescribed safe margin, an
electronic controller detects the power output of the turbine to pitch the blades
according to wind speed so that the leading edge of the blade is moved into the
wind. This is called “pitch control” [136]. When the power level is lower, the blades
are pitched to be at the optimal angle of attack to extract the maximum energy.
For this control method, optimization of the pitch angle distribution is necessary
for the maximum energy level at low speeds and the optimum constant power at
wind speeds more than the rated wind speed [137].
On the other hand, there is the “stall control” method. The stall power control
can be subdivided into passive and active stall power control. In the passive case,
the blades are attached to the hub at a fixed angle. When the wind speed is more
than the safe limit, the angle of attack of the blade airfoil is increased so that
laminar flow is changed into turbulent flow. The twisting behaviour of the blade is
gradually applied along the longitudinal axis rather than abrupt motion. This
ensures that the blade is exposed to its critical stall value of the incoming wind
speed. Active stall power control is applied to larger wind turbines, usually larger
than 1MW rated capacity. It uses blades whose pitches are able to be changed. At
low wind speeds, the blades are pitched like a pitch controlled turbine to obtain a
higher torque or turning force [139].
66
When the rated wind power level is reached, at the point of stall, its control
mechanism acts differently than in pitch control. The blades are pitched in the
opposite direction compared with the direction where the pitch-controlled blades
are oriented when the electrical generator is overloaded due to the excessive wind
speed [138], Figures 21 – 22.
Figure 21. Wind turbine control regime [138]
About -20° is known to be required for the full aerodynamic braking. The angle
of attack becomes the stall condition in this direction.
Figure 22. Active stall control at rated (left) and above rated (right) wind speed [140]
67
Through this active stall control, the power output is controlled with prevention
of overshooting of the rated power from the generator at the beginning of wind
gusts. At high wind speeds, the rated power can be preserved through this method
whereas passive stall control normally causes a decrease in power output in its
beginning phase at high wind speeds where the blades experience a deeper stall
than the blades controlled by the active stall method [141]. This study adopts the
wind turbine model with the stall control method.
2.2.4 3D rotational effect

The airfoil of wind turbine is exposed to the 3D rotational effect, unlikely the
airfoils in the airplane. Therefore, the numerical model to describe the enhanced
aerodynamic performance by the rotation around the wind turbine is necessary.
The impact of improved aerodynamics from the rotation is called the rotational
augmentation [52]. The software RFOIL uses the governing equation with the
centrifugal, Coriolis terms, higher-order terms, and radial pressure gradient to
depict the 3D rotation. Moreover, there is the quasi 3D Navier Stokes equation as
the 3D correction of flow equation in 2D [20, 40, 41].
The quasi-3D Navier-Stokes equation was derived from the variables of the
Navier- Stokes equation with cylindrical coordinates, which are on the rotating
frame of reference, Figure 23.
Figure 23. Velocity triangle at the (z, 𝜣) plane [42]
68
Figure 22 shows the initial conditions of the 3D equation in a 2D sense, where Vz

is the axial velocity, 𝛾 is the twist angle, and 𝛺 is the rotational speed. Far from the
airfoil, the velocities are
𝑾𝜣 = −𝜴𝒓 (58)
𝑾𝐳 = 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒕 (59)
𝑾𝐫 = 𝟎 (60)
For the peripheral, radial and axial directions, the continuity and momentum
equations are derived with some assumptions which are checked with the fully 3D
equations [45]. The model indicated that the local chord to radius ratio and the
twist angle of the blades were related to the 3D rotational effects.
The model was simulated for laminar and turbulent cases. In the laminar flow
simulation, the physics of 3D rotation was revealed through the radial velocity
field generation. It was taken from the production term of the radial momentum
equation. It causes the mass suction of the corresponding plane, which impacts the
separation bubble reduction [50]. As a result, the pressure on the side with the
radial velocity field, the suction side, is decreased with the proportion of the
reduced mass and separation bubbles [35].
In turbulent flow simulation, the calculations were made to formulate the 3D
correction law. The results were obtained from the performance of the 𝑘 − 𝜔
model with the wall functions and fully turbulent flow conditions, the C-type
197x45 grid with 145 nodes on the airfoil [146].
The load coefficients were modified by the semi-empirical correction law [39].
According to Chaviaropoulos and Hansen [42], the constants for the lift coefficient
and its corresponding correction law are following when = 2.2, ℎ = 1 and 𝑛 = 4.
𝒄 𝒉
𝑪𝒍,𝟑𝑫 = 𝑪𝒍,𝟐𝑫 + 𝒂 ( ) 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝒏 (𝒕𝒘𝒊𝒔𝒕)𝚫𝑪𝒍 (61)
𝒓
69
To support the necessity for consideration of 3D rotation, the experimental

results showed that the measured power of the 3D rotating wind turbine in a UAE
wind tunnel test is 15-20% higher than the 2D power production calculation [70].
The flow field structures over the blades under rotational augmentation were
depicted by the correlation between the normal force coefficient standard
deviation and the local inflow condition by Schreck [147]. The 3D measurements
from institutes such as SERI [148] indicate the sophisticated fluid flow phenomena
over the blades which cannot be explained by 2D calculations, Figure 24.
Figure 24. Pressure transducer for 3D measurement [148]
70
Chapter 3: Methods employed
3 METHODS EMPLOYED
The Figure 25 describes the whole process of the method, explained in the
following sections.
.
Figure 25. The whole process from the optimization to performance prediction
71
3.1 Airfoil Optimization

Genetic Algorithm codes
The GA optimization toolbox in MATLAB was used to run the set of algorithms.
The comparison between basic GA concepts and the current variables of this study
is in Table 1. The objective function was set to generate an airfoil with a higher
Glide Ratio (GR) value and higher transition point (Xtr), targeted for the larger
laminar layer region. The corresponding values are calculated by interfaced XFOIL
[19].
With the coordinates describing a certain airfoil, Reynolds number and Mach
number, XFOIL shows the results for the pressure distribution, lift, and drag
coefficients of the inserted airfoil.
The bounds for generating different airfoil shapes were set as upper and lower
bounds of up and down surfaces of airfoils, parameterized by a B-spline function in
MATLAB [149].
The y points of B-spline control points

Gene
of airfoil surface
Population Groups consist of different y points
The demand for higher Glide Ratio and larger

Environment
transition point
Fitness level Calculation results of objective function
Table 1. Comparison between concept in biological GA and current airfoil design
As if the birds of Galapagos island are evolved to have the fittest beak for
obtaining the food in the environment, the airfoil shapes are set to be evolved to
have the highest GR and transition point in the settled environment of MATLAB GA
codes, Figure 26.
72
Figure 26. Bird beaks in natural selection and airfoil shape in GA environment
Upper and lower bounds of GA with B-spline

The MATLAB code to dictate a B-spline is as follows [98],
𝑃 = [𝑥; 𝑦]
𝑐𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑠 = [𝑃 𝑃]
𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑡𝑠 = −2 ∗ 𝑎: 2 ∗ 𝑎 + 𝑛
𝑘 = 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ(𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑡𝑠) − 𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ(𝑐𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑠)
𝐵𝑠𝑝 = 𝑠𝑝𝑚𝑎𝑘(𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑡𝑠, 𝑐𝑜𝑒𝑓)
Based on certain conditions, Bsp is the B-form of the spline specified by the
knots and coeffs information, the order k is the number of knots minus the number
of coefficients and a is a factor used to define the order automatically based on the
number of points n (a = 0.25n+0.75). The P is the upper and lower point values,
which are found by defining values of x and y for all points; 𝑥 is defined by creating
a vector of 𝑛 = 2 linearly spaced numbers from 1 (the trailing edge) to 0 (the
leading edge) for the upper surface and vice versa for the corresponding lower
surface.
73
The 𝑦 points are set as variables to be chosen between the upper and lower
bounds by the algorithm:
𝑛 𝑛
𝑥 = [𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑒 (1,0, ) , 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑠𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑒(0,1, )]
2 2
The bounds used in the present study for limiting the selecting range of 𝑦 points
in the GA operation are shown in Figure 24. The suction side and pressure side of
an airfoil are denoted upper and lower surfaces. The upper and lower bounds (UB,
LB) were fixed for each upper surface and lower surface (US, LS).
The variable numbers, k order, were set from a previous study which
investigated the best options for maximizing the resulting GR value of the final
airfoil in GA [98, 149].
The upper and lower bounds (UB, LB) of upstream and lower stream (US, LS)
were set to be the range for the algorithm with fixed 𝑥 values and making 𝑦 values
the variable, Figure 27.
Figure 27. Airfoil shaped with B-spline to be fitted as the reference airfoil S809
GA algorithm with multi-objectives

Conceptually, the airfoils are considered as individuals which are exposed to
survival rate evaluation. The environment for the individual to survive was set to
74
demand a higher maximum Glide Ratio (GR) and a larger laminar boundary layer
of airfoils, recognized by larger transition points.
In MATLAB, the variable points of an airfoil were translated into elements in the
matrix and chromosomes were composed for each individual with different 𝑦 point
values. A data structure example is shown in Figure 28 [98].
Figure 28. Data structure example in Genetic Algorithm [91]
To generate an airfoil with a higher Glide Ratio (GR) and larger laminar
boundary layer region (transition points, Xtr) at the same time, the objective
function was formulated to evaluate both characteristics of the airfoil.
Among many m.files in MATLAB for running this operation, one which has an
objective function was commanded to be interfaced with XFOIL.
The main m.file was set for options of the GA tool box with population size 5,
Generation 100, MutationFcn with mutationadaptfeasible. The initial population
was set with specific individual points narrowed from the method in a previous
study [98, 149].
The main file connected the algorithm with m.file including the objective
function code, written as f=(-(TXtr+BXtr+GR)), to give the finally optimized
airfoil with maximized GR and transition point values. By adding the transition
point value and GR value, an airfoil which has higher points for both characteristics
could be chosen. A minus point was used in the objective function due to the
convergence characteristic of the GA toolbox in MATLAB.
The GR, TXtr and BXtr values were obtained from the results of XFOIL
calculation, where TXtr indicates the transition point on the airfoil suction side and
75
BXtr the transition point on the pressure side. The algorithm flow diagram will be
shown in Chapter 4.
76
3.2 Airfoil CFD Simulation

3.2.1 Mesh
Figure 29. Mesh Geometry
Figure 30. Mesh of airfoil S809gx close to the airfoil wall.
77
The C type mesh is generated by the mesh generation tools in SimFlow [150].
The size of the mesh and the fine mesh close to the wall are shown in Figure 29, 30.
The surface cell thickness is 2 ∗ 10−4 [𝑚], minimum surface cell length is
2 ∗ 10−3 [𝑚], and maximum surface cell length is 8 ∗ 10−3 [𝑚]. With grading 1.1,
the cell number is 60257 with 121800 nodes. At the upper surface, the min y+ is
0.125 and the max is 15.453 with an average of 2.999. At the lower surface, the min
y+ is 0.135 and the max is 15.032 with the average 2.439.
3.2.2 OpenFoam simulation

The software OpenFoam is open to any one as a C++ library [151]. The
applications are categorized as solvers to deal with problems in continuum
mechanics and utilities for controlling data. Based on the physical and
computational knowledge, the users can create solvers and utilities in the
software. It is constantly upgraded with newly created solvers by a large user
community in various science and engineering fields. To run the library, Linux
commands are required. To utilize OpenFoam libraries in a graphic user interface,
the software SimFlow is used. The SimFlow makes the connected steps from mesh
generation to post-process in ParaView for the results generation. Different kinds
of the latest turbulence models are available with discretization schemes and
numerical methods. The velocities, pressure, lift and drag forces can be calculated
and visualized [150].
After the mesh is set, the boundaries of each mesh section should be set as a
patch for inlet, outlet. The upper, lower, and tip part should be wall while the
airfoil part is empty. The Steady-state for operation time, Incompressible for flow,
and Turbulence model is set with the solver SIMPLE. The turbulence setting part
has the RANS section to select with the SA model at Alpha=12.2° and the 𝑘 −
𝜔 SST model at Alpha=20°.
The boundary condition inlet flows, Initial condition velocity flow should be set
as the velocity=15m/s which is proper with Re=106 from the experimental results
[194]. The discretization, solution, parameter, monitor and run part settings are
78
according to the reference, [196]. The post processing and visualization are
available in ParaView, Figure 31.
Figure 31. ParaView for S809gx flow visualization in dynamic stall
3.3 HAWT Performance Simulation

3.3.1 Qblade
The software Qblade is an open-source tool for wind turbine simulation
developed by the research team at the Technical University of Berlin. It has many
functions for simulating turbine performance under various wind conditions. The
initial guessing of the preliminary design of a wind turbine is possible with the
methods and tools equipped in Qblade.
Safe operation under different atmospheric environments with a considerable
lifetime is required when a novel wind turbine is designed. The aerodynamics and
structural and aeroelastic aspects should be evaluated for these requirements. The
characteristics of inserted airfoils are calculated from XFOIL and integrated into
Qblade and 360° polar extrapolation is done with Montgomerie or Viterna
methods. HAWT performances are simulated based on BEM methods with certain
79
simulation parameters and added effects, Figure 32. The airfoil polar calculation
with XFOIL, connected to the blade simulation and the turbine performance
Figure 32. Blade construction from Qblade
simulation by BEM and FV calculations are used in this study with the only
variation of the airfoil type.
Simulation settings
(1) Airfoil analysis
After two different types of airfoils are inserted, different Reynolds numbers for
the tip, middle and root parts were set as 5.5*105 , 8.5*105 and 9.5*105 , Figure 33.
Figure 33. Reference airfoil S809 and airfoil S809gx for XFOIL analysis
80
Figure 34. Extrapolation by Montgomerie method
The XFOIL results from an airfoil in the angle of attack range 0° to 25° are
expanded into the range up to 360°, by the Montgomerie extrapolation method,
Figure 34.
(2) Rotor design and analysis

The blades with airfoils S809 and S809gx were subjected to rotor analysis.. The
chord length and twist angle distributions were fixed following the NREL UAE
Phase VI wind turbine reference [16], Figure 35.
Based on BEM calculation, the corrections were set for tip loss, root loss, 3D
correction, Reynolds drag coefficient and foil interpolation. The blade was
discretized into 40 pieces and the convergence maximum epsilon was set as
0.1*10−2. The maximum number of iterations was set as 100 when the Relax
Factor is 0.35 with a Rho value of 1.225 and viscosity as 0.1647*10−5 .
Analysis settings were set at Tip Speed Ratio Starts at 0.1*10−4 and ends at 12
with Wind Speed at 6.8m/s.
81
Rotor performance values such as Power [W], Thrust [N] for different TSR and
Glide Ratio (GR) for radial position pos [m] were set to be calculated, Figure 36.
Figure 35. Blade construction
Figure 36. Rotor performance
82
(3) Turbine BEM simulation

To obtain Power, Turbine data was set to have Stall power regulation. The cut-in
velocity was set as 5m/s with cut-out velocity 25 m/s. The rotational speed was
71.63 rpm according to the reference and Weibull Settings were fixed as k=2 and
A=9, Figure 37.
Figure 37. Turbine simulation from BEM
83
3.3.2 Simulation with 3D correction

Polar correction
(1) The 2D polar values from XFOIL at each blade section are extracted, Figure
38.
Figure 38. 3D polar corrections of different sections of the blade
(2) The extracted Cl values are modified for 3D correction according to the
equations (59) from reference Hansen.
𝒄 𝒉
𝑪𝒍,𝟑𝑫 = 𝑪𝒍,𝟐𝑫 + 𝒂 ( ) 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝒏 (𝒕𝒘𝒊𝒔𝒕)𝚫𝑪𝒍 (62)
𝒓
(3) The corrected polar values from the 3D correction equation are incorporated
into the Qblade blade design section
(4) QBEM and QLLT simulations are run with the corrected polars.
84
Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
4 RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
4.1 GA airfoil optimization code

The set of MATLAB m.files are written with the settings of the optimal
conditions of the Genetic Algorithm of the current airfoil type [98], Table 2. The
control points of the B-spline are 10 with 𝑘 number 7. The generation is set up to
100. The mutation function is on.
[~,~,UB,LB,nvars]=input0;
options = gaoptimset(@ga);
options =
gaoptimset(options,'Display','off','PopulationSize',5,'Generation',100,'MutationFcn',
@mutationadaptfeasible);
options = gaoptimset(options,'InitialPopulation', [0.0568 0.0704 0.1195
0.1174 0.1045 -0.0400 -0.0145 0.0088 0.0266 0.0221; 0.0568 0.0704
0.1195 0.1174 0.1028 -0.0400 -0.0145 0.0088 0.0266 0.0227; 0.0568
0.0704 0.1195 0.1174 0.1045 -0.0400 -0.0145 0 0.0200 0.0221])
[X,fval,exitflag,output,population,score] =
ga(@objXtrGR,nvars,[],[],[],[],LB,UB,[],options);
Xtr=-fval
Table 2. The main m.file of GA optimization
85
The frame of GA 𝑦 points variation ranges is set based on the reference airfoil
S809, Figure 39.
Figure 39. Upper and lower bounds for the B-spline shaped airfoil
The whole process of the coded Genetic Algorithm (GA) interfaced with XFOIL is
shown in Figure 40.
86
Figure 40. The process of the Genetic Algorithm interfaced with XFOIL
87
4.2 Airfoils S809gx and S809

4.2.1 Airfoil shape and Blade
Airfoil
The optimized airfoil is named S809gx. The “g” represents its increased GR
(Glide Ratio) and “x” represents the Xtr (transition point), Figure 41.
Figure 41. Optimized airfoil S809gx and reference S809
S809 S809gx
Thickness (%) 20.99 20.3
Max. thickness possible (%) 38.3 38.7
Max. camber (%) 0.99 0.87
Max. camber possible (%) 83.3 43.6
Table 3. Airfoil properties
The thickness difference between the two airfoils is not significant. Whereas, the
upper and lower curvatures have slightly different curving orbits. The leading edge
of the optimized airfoil has a more rounded shape than the reference airfoil. The
trailing edge part is slightly thicker for the S809gx, Table 3.
The GR value of the resultant airfoil shows 128% larger from XFOIL calculation
and 123% larger by RFOIL at design angle of attack. The transition points of the
upper and lower surface of the airfoil S809gx also are located toward tail more
88
than the reference, indicating its increased laminar boundary layer region. These
values result from the target angle of attack 7° and Reynolds number of GA as
mentioned in Ch 3.1, Table 4.
XFOIL RFOIL
GR Top_Xtr Bot_Xtr GR Top_Xtr Bot_Xtr
S809 71.45 0.1792 0.5278 69.51 0.1624 0.5403
S809gx 91.75 0.4541 0.6842 85.29 0.2722 0.6767
Table 4. GR, transition values of top and bottom each airfoils at Alpha=7°, Re=𝟏𝟎𝟔
Blade
The blade is designed based on the chord size and pitch angle distribution based
on the reference blade information [154]. The only change is the airfoil type. It is
made to show the airfoil shape influence on the performances of the wind turbine.
Figure 42 – 44, Table 5. The detailed information of the blade design is in Appendix
2.
Figure 42. Blade 3D design with airfoil S809 (left) and S809gx (right)
89
Figure 43. Blade design top view with S809gx (left) and S809(right)
Figure 44. Blade design with S809gx (left) and S809 (right)
90
Radial Chord
Twist [°] Airfoil Type
Position [m] Length [m]
0.51 0.22 0.00 Circular
0.66 0.22 0.00 Circular
0.88 0.18 0.00 Circular
1.01 0.35 6.70 Circular
1.07 0.44 9.90 Circular
1.13 0.54 13.40 Circular
1.26 0.74 20.04 S809/S809gx
1.34 0.73 18.07 S809/S809gx
1.51 0.71 14.29 S809/S809gx
1.65 0.70 11.91 S809/S809gx
1.95 0.67 7.98 S809/S809gx
2.26 0.64 5.31 S809/S809gx
2.34 0.63 4.71 S809/S809gx
2.56 0.61 3.42 S809/S809gx
2.87 0.57 2.08 S809/S809gx
3.17 0.54 1.15 S809/S809gx
3.19 0.54 1.12 S809/S809gx
3.48 0.51 0.49 S809/S809gx
3.78 0.48 -0.02 S809/S809gx
4.02 0.46 -0.38 S809/S809gx
4.09 0.45 -0.48 S809/S809gx
4.39 0.42 -0.92 S809/S809gx
4.70 0.39 -1.35 S809/S809gx
4.78 0.38 -1.47 S809/S809gx
5.00 0.36 -1.78 S809/S809gx
5.31 0.33 -2.19 S809/S809gx
5.53 0.31 -2.50 S809/S809gx
Table 5. Blade design information [154]
91
4.2.2 Pressure Coefficient

To demonstrate the validity of following XFOIL calculations of airfoil polar
values, the simulated XFOIL results of Pressure Coefficient distributions of airfoil
S809 and its experimental results [154] are simultaneously plotted as below.
The 𝐶𝑝 values are extracted from three different angles of attack 1°, 5.2°, and
8.5°. The 𝐶𝑙 values of each angle of attack are 0.27, 0.77 and 1.01 at the reference
airfoil S809. The 𝐶𝑝 distributions of the airfoil s809gx are also calculated by XFOIL
at the same angle of attacks, 1°, 5.2°, and 8.5°. Figure 45 – 47.
The XFOIL and experimental results show good agreement for three angles of
attack regions, except small discrepancies in separation and laminar separation
bubble region [154]. The reference airfoil S809 shows bigger differences in
pressure coefficient, in other words, lift force. However, the reference airfoil
indicates more drastic evidence of laminar separation bubble formation than the
optimized S809gx on the mid-chord region at an angle of attack 5.2° and 8.5°.
After the pressure distribution reaches the suction peak, minimum pressure, at
each angle of attack, adverse pressure gradients occur on both airfoils. Because the
laminar layer region is set to be larger at the optimized airfoil S809gx overall
angles of attack, the laminar separation formation, and its reattachment occur
earlier and mildly.
Figure 45. 𝑪𝒑 of S809 and S809gx with experiment [154] at Alpha=1°
92
Figure 46. 𝑪𝒑 of S809 and S809gx with experiment[154] at Alpha=5.2°
Figure 47. 𝑪𝒑 of S809 and S809gx with experimental result [154] at Alpha=8.5°
93
4.2.3 Lift and Drag Coefficient

The lift and drag coefficient over angle of attack (Alpha) of each airfoils are
calculated by XFOIL and RFOIL. The XFOIL results are firstly compared with
experimental results [154], Figure 48-49.
Figure 48. 𝑪𝒍 – Alpha of airfoil S809 and S809gx and experiment [154] at Re= 𝟏𝟎𝟔
Figure 49. 𝑪𝒍 –𝑪𝒅 of airfoil S809 and S809gx and experiment [154] at Re= 𝟏𝟎𝟔
The XFOIL result shows a higher GR at the target angle of attack 7°, and the
maximum GR value is similar for two airfoils. However, all the GR values from
RFOIL are higher at the optimized airfoil S809gx over all angles of attack from
RFOIL calculations. The shape characteristics of the airfoil S809gx tend to increase
94
the GR graph more than the reference airfoil, if it is calculated with the centrifugal,
Coriolis terms, higher-order terms and radial pressure gradient in the governing
equations of RFOIL [20], Figure 50.
Figure 50. GR-Alpha of the airfoils from XFOIL (left) and RFOIL (right)
The 𝐶𝑙 /𝐶𝑑 are calculated by XFOIL and RFOIL for each part of the blades by
differentiation of Re number. The root part Re number is 5.5*105 , the middle part
is 8.5*105 , the tip part is 9.5*105 . Although the maximum GR values for S809 and
S809gx for each part of the blade are similar, the series of S809gx airfoils show a
larger range of angles of attack with an increasing tendency of the GR values. It
means that airfoil S809gx has a delayed point of AOA to start the flow separation
or stall. In other words, the x-axis lengths of airfoil S809gx, which shows increasing
GR in graph, are broader at S809gx than S809. The tip part has a 125% larger
length and the root part 130%, Figure 51.
In the Alpha regime, the starting point of decreasing the 𝐶𝑙 value is higher at the
airfoil S809gx series than the airfoil S809 series. As the separation occurs after the
alpha where maximum 𝐶𝑙 is reached, the separation of the S809gx airfoils needs a
higher alpha from the inflow wind than the S809 airfoils.
95
Figure 51. GR-Alpha values for the airfoils at each part of the blade
Specifically, on the tip part of the blade, the stall range of the blade for S809 is
initiated from an AOA of 17.5° whereas the blade for S809gx starts from an Alpha
of 19.5°. The viscous flow with higher friction factors starts later at the optimized
airfoil. The stall range of the blade for S809gx is 48.4% of that for the blade for the
reference airfoil, Figure 52 – 53.
Figure 52. 𝑪𝒍 -Alpha values for airfoils at each part of the blade
96
Figure 53. 𝑪𝒅 -Alpha values with Cd analysis, root part
The drag coefficients of the S809gx series are smaller than those of the reference
in all angles of attack regime. A large increase in drag is found at a smaller Alpha in
the S809 airfoil distribution than for S809gx. The smaller drag coefficients for
S809gx support previous results for the optimized shape which caused a smaller
𝐶𝑝 difference. The smaller drag also contributes to the larger range of Alpha with
increasing GR and Cl of S809gx. All the factors show that there is a higher
possibility of the optimized airfoil shape to cause lower drag from the surface-flow
interaction in the viscous flow region. The highest 𝐶𝑑 value at the root part of the
blade with airfoil S809 is 0.35 whereas the maximum 𝐶𝑑 value of the blade with
S809gx is 0.15. Especially the root part shows the largest difference in the drag
coefficient, Figure 54.
The drag distributions are subdivided to check the detailed influence of the
optimized airfoil shape on the drag. The drag distributions are divided into
pressure and friction drag. Figures 54 - 56 show the subdivided drag coefficients
for each part of the blade, root, middle, and tip. The pressure drags are very
different between the two types of airfoils whereas the friction drags show a
negligible difference.
97
Figure 54. Cd-Alpha values with Cd analysis (root part)
Figure 55. Cd-Alpha values with Cd analysis (middle part)
Figure 56. Cd-Alpha values with Cd analysis (tip part)
98
Although the thicknesses of two airfoils are similar, the boundary layer
thicknesses are different at two airfoils as it is shown in the next section 4.2.4.
The thinner boundary layer of the optimized airfoil causes a reduction in the
resisting force at the outer flow, which results in smaller pressure drag. Also, the
decreased differences of 𝐶𝑝 values and adverse pressure gradient found in
previous section support the smaller pressure drag of the optimized airfoil S809gx.
Furthermore, the effect of the reduced separation at the optimized airfoil can be
caused from the reduced pressure drag at the airfoil S809gx.
4.2.4 Boundary layer results

Transition points at boundary layer
A comparison of the transition point of the two airfoils is calculated by XFOIL.
The transition points of the airfoil S809 are compared to the experimental data
[154], too. At the top of the airfoil S809gx, the laminar region decreases as the
angle of attack increases. From Alpha=6.5° to 15°, airfoil S809gx has a larger
laminar boundary layer region than airfoil S809. At around Alpha ≈15.5°, the
boundary layers of both airfoils are completely turbulent.
On the bottom of the airfoils S809 and S809gx, the laminar region increases and
the boundary layer of S809gx get laminar from Alpha = 10.5°. Airfoil S809 has a
smaller area of the laminar boundary layer than S809gx at the bottom sides. The
transition points are plotted when leading edge is at point 0, and the trailing edge
is located at point 1 of airfoil span, Figure 57 - 58.
A broader laminar boundary region is found for airfoil S809gx than S809 in all
regions. A similar pattern of the results from RFOIL calculations are also given in
Appendix 4.
99
Figure 57. Transition point (Xtr) on the top of two airfoils at different Alpha, Re=𝟏𝟎𝟔
Figure 58. Transition point (Xtr) on the bottom of two airfoils at different Alpha, Re=𝟏𝟎𝟔
𝑫∗ and 𝑪𝒇 values
The thicknesses of the boundary layer at the root and middle section of the blade
are shown in Figure 59 – 60. The Reynolds number at each section are 5.5*106
and 8.5*106 . The thicker boundary layer at the reference airfoil is found at the root
section.
Based on the boundary layer equation (3), the velocity at outer flow is smaller at
the airfoil S809 than the S809gx in the root section of the blade. It is also
supported by the pressure distribution in Figure 45 -47, which shows higher
pressure difference distribution made by the reference airfoil shape.
100
As the thickness of the boundary layer is smaller at the airfoil S809gx, it is

assumed that the shear stress is larger and the airfoil S809gx in the root section.
This larger shear stress influences the higher friction coefficient, especially at the
nose part of the airfoil, Figure 60.
On the other hand, in the middle section with a higher Re number, the thickness
of the reference airfoil is greatly decreased than the optimized one, Figure 61.
Therefore, the friction coefficient at the reference airfoil is higher at the leading
edge, Figure 62. The outer velocity of the reference airfoil is far larger at the
reference one, and it can be assumed that the velocity distribution difference of the
airfoil is more drastic at the reference airfoil.
The thickness of the boundary layer around the airfoil is depended on the airfoil
shape and the Reynolds number, and the optimized airfoil has fewer variances in
thickness change and the velocity distribution in outer flow than the reference
airfoil.
Figure 59. Boundary layer thickness of S809 and S809gx at root section
101
Figure 60. Friction coefficient Cf of two airfoils at root section
Figure 61. Boundary layer thickness of S809 and S809gx at middle section
102
Figure 62. Friction coefficient Cf of two airfoils at middle

section
4.2.5 Power Curve with 3D correction

Lift Coefficient with 3D correction
The 3D correction law of Hansen [42] is applied for the 𝐶𝑙 correction of all
sections of the blade. The comparable reference experimental data are from [191].
Figure 63 - 65 shows the correction values of each representative blade section.
As revealed in reference [42], the 3D effect is more evident in the sections where
are close to the root of the blade. The 3D rotational effect decreased as the sections
are toward the tip of the blade. There is a high possibility of separation bubble
formation at the inboard part of the blades when the rotor is rotated due to the
higher incoming angles. However, the radial velocity component generated by the
3D rotating blades hinders the formation of the bubbles.
It is the reason for the higher 𝐶𝑙 values overall angle of attack at the root part of
the blade with 3D correction law. The radial velocity component is from the
Coriolis effects, as it is reasoned by the 3D-quasi-Navier-Stokes model, which
includes the production terms of the radial momentum of 3D rotation [40]. As the
103
airfoil S809gx receives more positive impact of 3D augmentation in the GR graph

of Figure 50, the power improvement in the optimized airfoil blade wind turbine is
greater than the reference.
Moreover, the delayed start of the boundary layer transition on the surface of
the optimized airfoil with a larger laminar boundary layer region decreases the
possibility of a separation bubble formation, which occurs at the transition area
inside the boundary layer [30], Figure 63 – 65. The decreased boundary layer
thickness at the airfoil S809gx in section 4.2.4 also support these results.
Figure 63. S809gx Cl with 3D correction law at blade section 30%
104
105
Power Curve
The increased GR targeted Alpha 7° in optimized airfoil resulted in the position
of highest GR at larger Alpha than the reference when the highest GR of the
reference S809 is reached at Alpha 5° from XFOIL results in section 4.2.3. The
delayed peak of the GR-Alpha graph caused by pressure drag reduction at the
airfoil S809gx influences the turbine power calculation, Figure 66.
Results of the power production calculations in the velocity range 3 – 25m/s by
BEM and FV codes which have the 3D corrected 2D airfoil polar data are shown in
Figure 56. The experimental data [153] are used as a reference. The BEM and FV
codes with 3D correction could predict reference wind turbine power performance
as similar to the experimental data up to velocity 15m/s. On the other hand, BEM
codes without 3D correction showed a far less accurate prediction of reference
wind turbine power.
The BEM and FV codes with 3D correction of wind turbines with optimized
airfoil could predict its power performance improvement at most 16~ 17 times
higher at V=15m/s. Physically, reduced separation caused by the optimized airfoil
shape with a larger laminar boundary layer which delays the start point of
maximum lift and transition. It could enhance the rotational effect of the wind
turbine with optimized airfoil to have higher power production. The increased GR
ratio in all angles of attack region of the optimized airfoil with RFOIL supports this
improved power production with 3D correction, which includes the radial
pressure and other 3D rotation related terms.
The 3D rotating effect which also delays the separation and secondary flows
from the root part of the rotor enhances the delayed separation of the blades more
dramatically in the optimized airfoil, as this airfoil shape shows higher
improvement in 3D effect than the reference airfoil. The detailed analysis of
increased power by the airfoil S809gx is explained in the next section.
106
Figure 66. The power calculated with 3D correction compared with the experimental data
Power Curve Analysis

The increased power calculation from the optimized airfoil is based on the BEM
equation (45)-(48) in Section 2.2. The equation (48) tells us that power increase is
directly connected to the tangential force value from (45). The improved power
from the blade of the airfoil S809gx is from the increased torque of the blade.
𝟏
𝒅𝑭𝒙 = 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓(𝑪𝑳 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝝋) − 𝑪𝑫 𝐜𝐨𝐬(𝝋)) (45)
𝟐
𝟏
𝒅𝑭𝒚 = 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓(𝑪𝑳 𝐜𝐨𝐬(𝝋) + 𝑪𝑫 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝝋)) (46)
𝟐
𝒅𝑸 = 𝑩𝒓𝒅𝑭𝒙 (47)
𝟏 𝟏𝟔 𝟏
𝒅𝑷 = 𝑩𝒅𝑭𝒙 r𝝎 = 𝑩 𝟐 𝝆𝒘𝟐 𝒄𝒅𝒓𝑪𝑳 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝝋)r𝝎 = 𝝆𝑨𝒗𝟑𝟏 𝟐𝝅𝒓𝒅𝒓 (48)
𝟐𝟕 𝟐
The different torque distributions from different wind turbine blades are in
Figure 67. It shows how torque values are greatly produced from the blade with
airfoil s809gx to influence power production based on equation (48). Although
107
different 𝐶𝐿 and 𝐶𝐷 distribution of two airfoils influence the tangential force

production to be higher at the blade with airfoil S809gx, their combined influence
on normal force is negligible based on equation (46), Figure 68.
Figure 67. Torque over Velocity of blade with reference and optimized airfoil
Figure 68. Thrust over Velocity of blade with reference and optimized airfoil
108
The optimized airfoil shows an advantageous shape for generating higher torque
values overall input velocity ranges while it results in small changes in thrust
distribution in the same velocity regime.
To show the details of changed 𝐶𝑙 and 𝐶𝑑 of the optimized airfoil S809gx and its
connected change in torque and thrust, the values of 𝐶𝑙 and 𝐶𝑑 at wind speed
15m/s are shown in Figure 69, 70. The wind velocity 15m/s is chosen as it is the
point where Power and Torque values are significantly improved with the
optimized airfoil. The combined effect of the increased 𝐶𝑙 values and decreased 𝐶𝑑
values make the optimized airfoil blade has increased tangential force over the
whole blade region, especially at the inboard section at pos=1m and tip part
pos=4m.
The tangential forces show the largest difference at position 1.28m and 4m,
Figure 71. For the analysis of tangential force difference, the comparison of 𝐶𝑙 and
𝐶𝑑 values of these positions of the blade is in Table 6.
Figure 69. Cl over blade position for turbine blade with reference and optimized airfoil
109
Figure 70. Cd over blade position for turbine blade with two airfoils
Figure 71. Tangential force over blade position for turbine blade with two airfoils
The optimized airfoil shape, which causes increased 𝐶𝑙 and decreased 𝐶𝑑 value,
makes tangential force increment c.a. 12 times higher at position 4m and 1.5 times
higher at 1.28m. The combined effects of increased tangential force at each point of
a blade by different airfoil shapes impact a blade with optimized airfoil to have
higher tangential force, in other words, torque. Based on equation (45), (47), (48)
the increased torque leads to increased power while thrust force is based on
normal force, from equation (46).
110
pos = 1.28m
𝐶𝑙 𝐶𝑑 Tangential Force [N/m]
S809gx 2.3569 0.1804 23.25
S809 1.7318 0.3351 16.15
pos = 4m
𝐶𝑙 𝐶𝑑 Tangential Force [N/m]
S809gx 1.2924 0.2318 10.50
S809 0.8211 0.3419 0.88
Table 6. Cl, Cd, Tangential Force of blades with two airfoils at pos= 1.28m and 4m
The changed 𝐶𝑙 and 𝐶𝑑 profile of the optimized airfoil causes different impact on
the tangential force and normal force due to its calculation results from equation
(45), (46). The calculated values of each term in tangential force equation (45) and
normal force equation (46) are compared in Table 8, based on the inflow angle 𝜓
at pos = 4m of Table 7.
S809gx S809
𝜓(°) 23.25 24.21

sin(𝜓) 0.3955 0.4099
cos(𝜓) 0.9184 0.9121
Table 7. Sin(𝝍) and cos(𝝍) values at inflow angle 𝝍 at blade pos=4m
𝐶𝑙𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓) 𝐶𝑙𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓)
𝐶𝑙𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓) 𝐶𝑑𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) 𝐶𝑙𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) 𝐶𝑑𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓)
−𝐶𝑑𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) + 𝐶𝑑𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓)
S809gx 0.2983 1.2786 0.5111 0.2128 1.1869 0.0917
S809 0.0247 0.8891 0.3366 0.3119 0.7490 0.1402
Table 8. Calculated values of each term at equation (45), (46) at blade pos=4m
At blade position 4m, the value of the equation 𝐶𝑙𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓) − 𝐶𝑑𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) of

tangential force equation (45) is 12 times larger than the reference. When the
value from 𝐶𝑙𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) + 𝐶𝑑𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓) of normal force equation (46) is 1.4 times larger.
It shows the different combinations of changed 𝐶𝑙 and 𝐶𝑑 values multiplied with
111
𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓) and 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) largely influence tangential force equation (45) while it
insignificantly impacts the normal force equation (46).
In detail, the optimized airfoil with increased 𝐶𝑙 and decreased 𝐶𝑑 values multiplied
with 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓) and 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) makes the minus calculation result of equation (45) bigger
than the reference. On the other hand, the increased 𝐶𝑙 and decreased 𝐶𝑑 of the
optimized airfoil multiplied with 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜓) and 𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜓) have smaller influence when
each term is added in equation (46).
It explains why increased lift and reduced drag coefficients, GR ratio, caused by
the optimized airfoil shape influence tangential force more than the normal force.
The optimization of the S809gx airfoil shape resulted in different 𝐶𝑙 and 𝐶𝑑
distribution overall velocity range. The difference in tangential and normal forces
are also generated in each blade position. When the tangential force is connected
to the torque value while the normal force is related to the thrust force.
The different 𝐶𝑙 and 𝐶𝑑 values of the airfoils are related to the different
boundary layer parameters and pressure distribution around the two different
airfoils as it is mentioned in section 4.2.1 – 4.2.3.
112
4.3 Airfoil Flow Simulation

Flow regime table
The blade with different airfoil receives different angle of attack at the same
inflow velocity because of its dissimilar airfoil curvature. The flow regime table
shows the subdivision of angle of attack and velocity distribution based on the
various flow behaviour. It is to check how the fluid flow behaves over the angle of
attack and velocity at each blade position for two airfoils.
The categorization of the flow regime is by the flow conditions, Table 9. When
the lift coefficient increases linearly, the flow region is fully attached, and the lift
coefficient values get flat out until it shows the maximum peak value.
Correspondingly, the GR graph increases linearly then decreases from the point of
the separation or adverse pressure gradient. This region of the graph with a
relatively flat tendency of lift coefficient and the peak value of the GR graph
indicate the separation and transition of the flow. When the lift coefficient and GR
value gradually decreases from the maximum peak value, the flow experiences the
onset of the flow separation, and the dynamic stall occurs [154, 190, 191].
The categorization of flow behaviour at a different angle of attack is shown in
Figure 72 – 73. Based on various angles of attack region, the velocity distribution
over the blade position with flow pattern is also depicted in Figure 74 – 75.
Fully Separation/ Dynamic

attached transition stall
S809 root 0~5 5 ~ 6.5 6.5~25
S809 middle 0~5 5 ~ 6.5 6.5~25
S809 tip 0~6.5 6.5~7 7~25
S809gx root 0~5 5~7 7~25
S809gx middle 0~5 5~7 7~25
S809gx tip 0~6 6~8.5 8.5~25
Table 9. Angle of attack (°) values of each airfoil at different flow regime
113
Figure 72. Flow Characteristics of blade with S809 with GR
Figure 73. Flow Characteristics of blade with S809 with GR
Figure 74. Flow Characteristics of blade with S809gx with Velocity
114
Figure 75. Flow Characteristics of blade with S809gx with Velocity
Based on the flow regime table, the angle of attack (Alpha) 12.2° and 20° are in
the stall regime. Two alpha values are chosen for the CFD simulation to compare
the different fluid stall behaviour of both airfoils in next section.
Validation Data
The OpenFoam simulation of the reference airfoil S809 is compared to the
experimental results of the pressure coefficient values at Re=106 . The two cases of
the angle of attacks are simulated, Alpha=12.2°, and Alpha=20° with comparison
from the experimental data [194]. Except for the small discrepancies at the middle
and trailing edge part of the airfoil, the simulation and experimental data show
good agreement in the case of Alpha=12.2°, Figure 76.
At the Alpha=20°, which shows the extreme stall flow development in the airfoil
has disagreement between simulated results and experimental data [198] at the
nose section. In general, the pressure coefficients around the other part of airfoil
show good agreement between experiment and simulation results except for the
front 10% region of airfoil nose. The left part of the airfoil surface and the lower
surface flow visualization can be accepted at Alpha=20°.
115
Figure 76. −𝑪𝒑 values of S809 compared to the experiment at Alpha = 12.2° [194]
Figure 77. −𝑪𝒑 values of S809 compared to the experiment at Alpha = 20° [194]
Angle of Attack (Alpha) = 12.2°

The pressure distribution and the velocity Line Integral Convolution (LIC) [195]
of two airfoils at Alpha=12.2° are in Figure 78 – 82. The pressure difference from
the upper and lower part of the airfoil is bigger at the reference airfoil S809. It also
shows the higher pressure distribution at the top and the bottom of the airfoil
116
surfaces, which leads to a higher adverse pressure gradient formation to have

separation possibility.
Figure 78. -𝑪𝒑 of airfoil S809 and S809gx at Alpha=12.2°
Figure 79. 𝑪𝒑 and contour line of airfoil S809 at Alpha=12.2°
117
Figure 80. 𝑪𝒑 and contour line of airfoil S809gx at Alpha=12.2°
The velocity LIC shows a similar distribution pattern, however, the reference has
slightly bigger vortex formation at the airfoil tail from the larger adverse pressure
gradients.
118
Figure 81. Velocity LIC of airfoil S809 at Alpha=12.2°
Figure 82. Velocity LIC of airfoil S809gx at Alpha=12.2°
119
Angle of Attack (Alpha) = 20°
Figure 83. –𝑪𝒑 of airfoil S809 and S809gx at Alpha=20°
The pressure coefficients of two airfoils show the start point of the separation at
the upper surface occurs at the rear position at the airfoil S809gx. It is also shown
in pressure visualization, Figure 84 -85. The airfoil S809 has the smallest pressure
spot near to the leading edge, which implies the trailing edge vortex formation.
As the trailing edge vortex is more evident at the airfoil S809 in Alpha=12.2°,
the trailing edge vortex, separation, and the flow stall occur in a broader region at
the reference airfoil. The flow separation is formed in the rear part of the upper
surface at the airfoil S809gx from the reduced adverse pressure gradient, which is
caused by the rounder nose and symmetric airfoil geometry. The reduced stall and
separation at the higher stall angle of attack regime at the airfoil S809gx explains
its improved aerodynamic performance and increased impact from the 3D
correction law.
120
Figure 84. 𝑪𝒑 and contour line of airfoil S809 at Alpha=20°
Figure 85. 𝑪𝒑 and contour line of airfoil S809 at Alpha=20°
121
Figure 86. Velocity LIC at airfoil S809 at Alpha=20°
Figure 87. Velocity LIC at airfoil S809gx at Alpha=20°
122
4.4.2 Comparison of experiment and CFD

The experimental observations of flow behaviour at a different angle of attacks
for the airfoil S809 [156] are compared with the CFD simulation results.
The experimental model had a 600mm chord and a 1248mm span. In the upper
space, span-wise orifices were located to observe the two-dimensional flow at the
various angles of attack. In the wind tunnel model with turbulence 0.02% at
10m/s, a multi-tube manometer measured the pressures and moments on the
airfoil. An airfoil surface coated with oil and microphone detection found the
transition points of the boundary layer [156, 157].
Table 10 illustrates the common and different points between the experimental
and CFD results of flow behaviour in the stall situation.
CFD Experiment
Common aspects
 Turbulent, trailing edge separation at suction side at higher AOA
 Stall becomes apparent as AOA increases
 Bubble formation and propagation towards downstream as AOA increases,
constant bubble length
Different aspects
 Detailed laminar separation
 Detailed chronology of
bubbles at lower AOA
separation, stall and LSB
 The AOA changes to see the
 Fixed AOA with varied time
change of LSB location
Table 10. Common and different aspects of CFD and Experiment
The current CFD results ensured the capture of the characteristics of flow about
the airfoil surface and stall appearance as in the experiments. The CFD results also
described the chronology of bubble flow and movement tendency in accordance
with the experimental results [156, 158].
123
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Outlook
5 CONCLUSION AND
OUTLOOK
The airfoil is designed with a Genetic Algorithm with the objective function of
higher GR and transition point. It is to find the specific shape of the airfoil for
higher aerodynamic performance in a wind turbine with enlargement of its
laminar boundary layer region. The reference is the airfoil S809 from NREL Phase
VI wind turbine. The optimized airfoil, S809gx, shows a more rounded leading
edge and symmetric geometry with the similar thickness of the reference. The
blade design is based on the parameters of the reference with the only variance of
the airfoil type.
As the GR value and transition point are set to be higher at targeted Alpha 7°, the
maximum peak of the GR-Alpha graph is located at the higher Alpha from XFOIL
calculation. When the GR is calculated with 3D rotational terms from RFOIL, the
S809gx airfoil shows higher values in all Alpha regime. The highest GR at the S09gx
is 1.1 times higher than the reference. It shows the optimized airfoil receives a
more positive influence on GR from the 3D rotational effect than the reference.
The delayed maximum peak of GR graph and reduced separation and adverse
pressure gradient occur in higher Alpha at the optimized airfoil. The drag
coefficient shows smaller values at the S809gx over all alpha regime, especially
pressure drag is greatly decreased. The changed boundary layer transition by the
airfoil shape impacts the outer velocity distribution of the S809gx to be higher at
the root and smaller at the middle section.
Like the GR calculation from RFOIL, the power calculation with 3D correction at
inflow velocity from 0 to 25m/s shows the wind turbine with the optimized airfoil
blade has higher power production. Specifically, at the velocity 15m/s, the power
values reach c.a. 1.6 times higher at the wind turbine with S809gx. The 3D rotation
124
Chapter 5: Conclusion and Outlook
augmentation especially at the root section of the blades with the airfoil S809gx
which receives higher enhancement by the radial pressure gradient and the
Coriolis force. Moreover, the reduced separation and adverse pressure gradient at
the optimized airfoil result in the power increase. In detail, the increased 𝐶𝑙 and
decreased 𝐶𝑑 of the airfoil S809gx cause the improved torque with the relatively
constant thrust. It shows the optimized airfoil S809gx shape is advantageous to
lead the rise in the torque by the combination of 𝐶𝑙 , 𝐶𝑑 , and different inflow angles
caused by the delicately shaped curvature especially at the stall inflow velocity
V=15m/s.
The visualization of flow around the airfoils is simulated by CFD OpenFoam with
the Spalart-Allmaras (SA) and 𝑘 − 𝜔 SST turbulence model. The greater
differences of 𝐶𝑝 over the optimized airfoil are found at blade position 1.28m and
4m when the input velocity is 15m/s. The location of maximum and minimum
pressure spots is also found to be at the nose and upper surface of the airfoil,
respectively. The smaller region of stall and reduction of the laminar separation of
bubbles are found at the flow around the optimized airfoil.
In summary, it is shown that the optimized airfoil shape targeted for higher GR
and larger laminar boundary layer affect the pressure distribution around the
airfoil and blade. This changed pressure distribution leads the airfoil to have
increased power with higher torque and small change in thrust. The increased
torque causes aerodynamic performance improvement while the relatively
constant thrust allows the structural stability. The small change in the airfoil
curvature leads the detailed variances on aerodynamic parameters of the blade
and the wind turbine. The changed airfoil shape of S809gx also demonstrates
increased sensitivity on influence from the 3D rotational effects.
In future studies, the airfoil optimization for the higher laminar layer region
based on different reference airfoils and wind turbines can be carried out for
generalization of the role of the enlargement of the laminar boundary layer.
The details on different 3D rotation effect sensitivity from the airfoil curvature
are also necessary to reveal the knowledge between aerodynamic improvement
and airfoil in a wind turbine. Besides, the experiments to compare the fluid flow
around two different airfoils are needed.
125
Chapter 6: References
6 REFERENCES
[1] United Nations (2015), Paris Agreement,
http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php
[2] Marrakech Climate Change Conference (2016), MARRAKECH ACTION
PROCLAMATION FOR OUR CLIMATE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT,
http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/marrakech_nov_2016/application/pdf/marrakec
h_action_proclamation.pdf
[3] International Renewable Energy Agency https://www.irena.org/wind
[4] Word Wind Energy Association https://library.wwindea.org/global-
statistics/
[5] James F. Manwell, Jon G. McGowan, Anthony L. Rogers (2009). Wind Energy
Explained: Theory, Design and Application, . 2nd ed. UK: Wiley
[6] John Smeaton (1837). Reports of the Late John Smeaton, F.R.S., Made on
Various Occasions, in the Course of His Employment as a Civil Engineer. 2nd ed.
London, UK: M. Taylor
[7] Wragg, D.W (1974), Flight before flying, Osprey
[8] Otto Lilienthal (2000). Birdflight As the Basis of Aviation: A Contribution
Towards a System of Aviation. 1st ed. United States: Markowski International
Publishers
[9] P. Garrison (2009), Airfoils: A Short History, from flat panels to curved
surface, © 2017 Flying Magazine
[10] D. Lednicer (2010), The Incomplete Guide to Airfoil Usage, Aeromechanical
Solutions LLC, © 2017 UIUC Applied Aerodynamics Group
[11] Ludwig Prandtl, O. G. Tietjens (2012). Applied Hydro- and Aeromechanics,
Dover Books on Aeronautical Engineering, Dover Publications
[12] Michael J. Rycroft, Wei Shyy, editors (2012). A History of Aerodynamics:
And Its Impact on Flying Machines, Cambridge Aerospace Series, New Ed Edition
ed. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press
126
[13] Jacobs, Eastman N. (1939), National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics,

NASA Technical Reports Server, Updated: 1996
[14] A.C. Hansen, C.P. Butterfield (1993), Aerodynamics of Horizontal-Axis Wind
turbines, Vol. 25:115-149
[15] J.L. Tangler, D.M. Somers (1995), NREL airfoil families for HAWT's. In:
WIND POWER
[16] W. A. Timmer, R. P. J. O. M. van Rooij (2003). Summary of the Delft
University Wind Turbine Dedicated Airfoils. In: ASME 2003 Wind Energy
Symposium; January 6–9, 2003; Reno, Nevada, USA. ASME; 2003. p. WIND2003-
352, pp. 11-21. DOI: 10.1115/WIND2003-352
[17] P. Fuglsang, C. Bak (2001), Design and Verification of the NewRisø-A1
Airfoil Family for Wind Turbines. In: A collection of the 2001 ASME wind energy
symposium technical papers at the 39. AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and
exhibition. AIAA-2001-0028;
[18] F. Grasso (2011), Usage of Numerical Optimization in Wind Turbine Airfoil
Design. In: Proceedings, 28th AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference; 28 June-
1July 2010; Chicago, IL, USA
[19] M. Drela, (1989), XFOIL: An analysis and design system for low Reynolds
number airfoils, In:Lecture Notes in Engineering 54, Springer Verlag
[20] Rooij, R.P.J.O.M. van (1996); Modification of the boundary layer calculation
in RFOIL for improved airfoil stall prediction. Rapport IW-96087R.
[21] J.F. MANWELL, J.G. MCGOWAN, A.L. ROGERS(2009), Wind Energy
Explained, Theory, Design and Application, 2nd Edition, WILEY, pp. 340-345
[22] https://nwtc.nrel.gov/TurbSim
[23] https://nwtc.nrel.gov/AeroDyn
[24] https://nwtc.nrel.gov/FAST
[25] M.L. Buhl, Jr., A. Manjock (2006), A comparison of wind turbine aeroelastic
codes used for certification, E 9.17:NREL/CP-500-39113
[26] J.G. Schepers, VEWTDC (2001), Verification of European Wind Turbine
Design Codes, Final Report for JOR3-CT98-0267 Joule III project, ECN
127
[27] J. M. Jonkman and M. L. Buhl, Jr (2007) Development and Verification of a

Fully Coupled Simulator for Offshore Wind Turbines, Conference Paper NREL/CP-
500-40979
[28] F. Mahnuddin, S. Klara, H. Sitepu, S. Hariyanto (2017), Airfoil Lift and Drag
Extrapolation with Viterna and Montgomerie Methods, Energy Procedia 105, 811-
816, The 8th International Conference on Applied Energy – ICAE 2016
[29] http://www.q-blade.org
[30] P. Chaviaropoulos, M.O.Hansen (2000) Investigating three-dimensional and
rotational effects on wind turbine blades by means of a quasi-3d Navier-Stokes
solver. Journal of Fluids Engineering
[31] Matthew Dale Lennie (2013), Development of the QFEM Solver, Master of
Science Thesis, Master’s Thesis undertaken at the Technical University of Berlin
[32] D. Marten, M. Lennie, G. Pechlivanoglou, C.N. Nayeri, C.O. Paschereit (2015),
Implementation, Optimization and Validation of a Nonlinear Lifting Line Free
Vortex Wake Module Within the Wind Turbine Simulation Code QBlade,
Proceedings of ASME Turbo Expo 2015, GT2015-43265
[33] D. Marten (2015), QBlade v0.9, Guidelines, © Copyright 2015, TU Berlin
[34] Himmelskamp, H (1945), Profile Investigation on a Rotating Airscrew,
Technical Report Ph.D. Dissertation, Gottingen, Germany.
[35] Ronsten, G. (1991), Static Pressure Measurements on a Rotating and a Non-
Rotating 2.375 m Wind Turbine Blade—Comparison with 2-D Calculations,
Proc. of the EWEC ’91 Conference, Amsterdam, pp. 214–220.
[36] Bruining, A., Van Bussel, G. J. W., Corten, G. P., and Timmer, W. A. (1993),
Pressure Distribution from a Wind Turbine Blade; Field Measurements Compared
to 2-Dimensional Wind Tunnel Data, Technical report IW-93065R, Delft Univ. of
Technology, Institute of Wind Energy.
[37] Hansen, M. O. L., Soerensen, J. N., Michelsen, J. A., and Soerensen, N. N
(1997), A Global Navier-Stokes Rotor Prediction Model, 35th AIAA Aerospace
Sciences Meeting & Exhibit, Reno, AIAA paper 97-0970
[38] Snel, H., Houwink, R., and Piers, W. J. (1992), Sectional Prediction of 3-D
Effects for Separated Flow on Rotating Blades, Eighteenth European Rotorcraft
Forum, Avignon, France
128
[39] Snel, H., Houwink, R., Bosschers, J., Piers, W. J., and Bruining, A. (1993),
Sectional Prediction of 3-D Effects for Stalled Flows on Rotating Blades and
Comparison with Measurements, Proc. of the ECWEC ’93 Conference,
Travemunde, Germany, pp. 395–399
[40] Soerensen, D. N., and Soerensen, J. N. (1995), Quasi 3-Dimensional Model
for Rotating Airfoil, 13th AIAA Applied Aerod Conf., San Diego, CA, AIAA
95-1916.
[41] Shen, W. Z., and Soerensen, J. N. (1999), Quasi-3D Navier-Stokes Model for
Rotating Airfoil, J. Comput. Phys., 150, pp. 518–548
[42] Chaviaropoulos P, Hansen MO. (2000), Investigating three-dimensional and
rotational effects on wind turbine blades by means of a quasi-3d Navier-Stokes
solver. Journal of Fluids Engineering 2000; 122(2):330–336.
[43] Bird R. B., Steward W. E., and Lightfoot E. N. (2002), Transport Phenomena,
Wiley, LCCCN: 60-11717, pp. 82–92.
[44] Vavra, M. H. (1974), Aero-Thermodynamics and Flow in Turbomachines, R.
E. Krieger Publ. ISBN 0-88275-189-1, pp. 107–132.
[45] Hansen, M. O. L., Soerensen, N. N., Soerensen, J. N., and Michelsen, J. A.
(1997), Extraction of Lift, Drag and Angle of Attack from Computed 3-D Viscous
Flow around a Rotating Blade, European Wind Energy Conference, Dublin, pp.
499–502.
[46] Duque EP, Burklund MD, Johnson W (2003). Navier-Stokes and
comprehensive analysis performance predictions of the NREL phase VI
experiment. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 2003; 125(4):457–467.
[47] Pape AL, Lecanu J. (2004), 3D Navier–Stokes computations of a stall-
regulated wind turbine. Wind Energy 2004; 7(4):309–324.
[48] Johansen J, Sorensen N, Michelsen J, Schreck S. (2002), Detached-eddy
simulation of flow around the NREL phase VI blade. ASME 2002 Wind Energy
Symposium, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 2002; 106–114.
[49] Bangga G, Lutz T, Kra ̈mer E. (2015), An examination of rotational effects on
large wind turbine blades. EAWE, PhD Seminar 11, Stuttgart, Germany, September
23-25, 2015
129
[50] Dumitrescu, H., Cardos, V. (2012), Inboard Stall Delay due to Rotation,
Journal of Aircraft 49 (1), pp. 101–107
[51] Du Z, Selig M. (1998), A 3-d stall delay model for HAWT performance
prediction. AIAA Paper 98-0021
[52] Bangga G, Lutz T, Jost E, Kraemer E (2017), CFD studies on rotational
augmentation at the inboard sections of a 10 MW wind turbine rotor, JOURNAL OF
RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY 9, 023304
[53] Du Z, Selig M (2000). The effect of rotation on the boundary layer of a wind
turbine blade. Renewable Energy 2000; 20(2):167–181.
[54] J.A. Snyman (2005), Practical Mathematical Optimization : An Introduction
to Basic Optimization Theory and Classical and New Gradient-Based Algorithms, ©
2005 Springer
[55] AFP Ribeiro, AM Awruch, HM Gomes (2012). An airfoil optimization
technique for wind turbines. Appl Math Model 2012;36:4898–907.
[56] S. N. Sivanandam, S. N. Deepa (2008), Introduction to Genetic Algorithm,
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
[57] S . Obayashi (1996), Aerodynamic optimization with evolutionary
algorithms, Control’96, UKACC international conference on (Conf Publ No. 427):
IET; 1996, pp. 687–92.
[58] P. Fuglsang, C. Bak, J. G. Schepers, B. Bulder, T. T. Cockerill, P. Claiden, A.
Olesen, R. van Rossen (2002) Site- specific Design Optimization of Wind Turbines,
Wind Energy, Volume 5, Issue 4, pp. 261-279
[59] Kenway G, Martins J. Aerostructural shape optimization of wind turbine
blades considering site-specific winds (2008), In: Proc of 12th AIAA/ISSMO
multidisciplinary analysis and optimization conference.
[60] A Ning,R Damiani, P Moriarty (2013), Objectives and constraints for wind
turbine optimization. In: 31st ASME wind energy symposium
[61] Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995). Particle swarm optimization. In: Proceedings
of IEEE international conference on neural networks, pp. 1942–8.
[62] Liao CC, Zhao XL, Xu JZ (2012). Blade layers optimization of wind turbines
using FAST and improved PSO algorithm. Renew Energy 2012;42:227–33.
130
[63] Chen J, Wang Q, Shen WZ, Pang XP, Li SL, Guo XF (2013). Structural
optimization study of composite wind turbine blade. Mater Des 2013;46:247–55.
[64] Diveux T, Sebastian P, Bernard D, Puiggali J, Grandidier J (2001). Horizontal
axis wind turbine systems: optimization using genetic algorithms. Wind Energy
2001;4:151–71.
[65] Jureczko M, Pawlak M, Mezyk A (2005). Optimisation of wind turbine
blades. J Mater Process Technol 2005;167:463–71.
[66] Liu X, Chen Y, Ye Z (2007). Optimization model for rotor blades of
horizontal axis wind turbines. Front Mech Eng China 2007;2:483–8.
[67] Selig MS, Coverstone-Carroll VL (1996). Application of a genetic algorithm
to wind turbine design. J Eng Res – ASME 1996;118:22–8.
[68] A. Chehouri, R. Younes, A. Ilinca and J. Perron (2015) Review of
performance optimization techniques applied to wind turbines. Applied Energy,
2015, vol. 142, issue C, 361-388.
[69] G. Madeluing, H. Prem, E.H. Hirschel (2004), Aeronautical Research in
Germany: From Lilienthal until Today, Springer
[70] Hand MM, Simms DA, Fingersh LJ, Jager DW, Cotrell JR, Schreck S, Larwood
SM. (2001), Unsteady aerodynamics experiment phase VI: Wind tunnel test
configurations and available data campaigns 2001. Technical Report, NREL/TP-
500-29955
[71] J. H. Ferziger, M. Peric (2001), Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics,
Springer, 3rd Ed.
[72] A. Memon, S. R. Samo, M. Asad, F. H. Mangi (2015), Modeling of
Aerodynamic Forces on the Wind Turbine Blades, Journal of Clean Energy
Technologies, Vol. 3, No. 6, November 2015.
[73] R. J. Barthelmie, K. Hansen, S. T. Frandsen, O. Rathmann, J. G. Schepers, W.
Schlez, J. Phillips, K. Rados, A. Zervos, E. S. Politis, P. K. Chaviaropoulos (2009),
Modelling and measuring flow and wind turbine wakes in large wind farms
offshore, Volume 12, Issue 5, pp. 431–444
[74] F. Khalili (2014), Three-Dimensional CFD Simulation and Aeroacoustics
Analysis of Wind Turbines, Master Thesis, University of South Florida, ProQuest,
UMI Dissertations Publishing, 2014. 1558691
131
[75] S. Kalvig, E. Manger,B. Hjertager (2014), Comparing different CFD wind

turbine modelling approaches with wind tunnel measurements, Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, Volume 555, conference 1
[76] N. Stergiannis, C. Lacor, J. V. Beeck, R. Donnelly (2016), CFD modelling
approaches against single wind turbine wake measurements using RANS, Journal
of Physics: Conference Series 753 (2016) 032062
[77] Sergio Jesús Rodríguez Sánchez (2014), Analysis of flow separation over
aerodynamic airfoils, Bachelor thesis, Aerospace Engineering, UNIVERSIDAD
CARLOS III DE MADRID ESCUELA POLITÉCNICA SUPERIOR
[78] Johnson, Clifford (1976), Introduction to Natural Selection. Baltimore, MD:
University Park Press.
[79] Darwin, Charles (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural
Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1st ed.).
London: John Murray.
[80] Th. Bäck, D.B. Fogel, and Z. Michalewicz (1997). Handbook of Evolutionary
Computation, ISBN 0750303921
[81] Mills, Susan K.; Beatty, John H. (1979). The Propensity Interpretation of
Fitness, Philosophy of Science. 46 (2): 263–286
[82] Pearson H (2006), Genetics: what is a gene?, Nature. 441 (7092): 398–401.
Bibcode:2006Natur.441.398P
[83] Koza, John R. (1996), Genetic programming : on the programming of
computers by means of natural selection. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. ISBN 0-
262-11170-5.
[84] M. Davarynejad, M.-R. Akbarzadeh-T, N. Pariz (2007), A novel general
framework for evolutionary optimization: Adaptive fuzzy fitness granulation
Evolutionary Computation. CEC 2007. IEEE..
[85] Windle, Bertram C. A. (1915). Mendel and His Theory of Heredity". A
Century of Scientific Thought and Other Essays. Burns & Oates.
[86] King, RC; et al. (2006). A Dictionary of Genetics (7th ed.). Oxford University
Press. p. 129. ISBN 978-0-19-530761-0
[87] Pavel Krömer, Václav Snáel, Ivan Zelinka (2013), Randomness and Chaos in
Genetic Algorithms and Differential Evolution, Intelligent Networking and
132
Collaborative Systems (INCoS), 2013 5th International Conference on Intelligent

Networking and Collaborative Systems
[88] Wolfram, Antonin; Neumann, Heinz (2016). Chromosome condensation and
decondensation during mitosis. Current Opinion in Cell Biology. Elsevier Ltd. 40:
19. doi:10.1016/j.ceb.2016.01.013
[89] Winkler, HL (1920). Verbreitung und Ursache der Parthenogenesis im
Pflanzen- und Tierreiche. Jena: Verlag Fischer.
[90] Thomason, Lynn; Court, Donald L.; Bubunenko, Mikail; Costantino, Nina;
Wilson, Helen; Datta, Simanti; Oppenheim, Amos (2007). "Recombineering: genetic
engineering in bacteria using homologous recombination". Current Protocols in
Molecular Biology. Chapter 1: Unit 1.16
[91] Andrew Chipperfield, Peter Fleming, Hartmut Pohlheim, Carlos Fonseca
(1995) Genetic Algorithm TOOLBOX For Use with MATLAB ® , Version 1.2, User's
Guide
[92] Ward Cheney and David Kincaid (1980), Numerical mathematics and
computing, sixth edition, ,pp. 372 – 404
[93] Djunaidy Santoso and Wikaria Gazali (2017), The Benefits of Bezier, B-
Spline Algorithm in the Industry World, Proceedings of the International
MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2017 Vol I
[94] Fanjoy, D.W. and Crossley, W.A (1998), Aerodynamic Shape Design for
Rotor Airfoils via Genetic Algorithm, Journal of the American Helicopter Society,
Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 263–270.
[95] Viccini, A., and Quagliarella, D (1997), Inverse and Direct Airfoil Design
Using a Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm,”., AIAA Journal, Vol. 25, No. 9, pp. 1499–
1505
[96] Greg W. Burgreen and Oktay Baysal (1994). Aerodynamic shape
optimization using preconditioned conjugate gradient methods, AIAA Journal, Vol.
32, No. 11, pp. 2145-2152.
[97] J.Hajek (2007) Parameterization of Airfoils and its application in
aerodynamic optimization, WDS'07 Proceedings of Contributed Papers, Part I,
233–240, 2007
133
[98] Youjin Kim (2014), Genetic Algorithm Optimization of Variable Airfoil Blade
of Wind Turbines, Mater thesis, Institute of Fluid Mechanics (LSTM), FAU Busan
Campus, FAU Erlangen-Nuernberg
[99] Anderson, John D (1995). Computational Fluid Dynamics: The Basics With
Applications. Science/Engineering/Math. McGraw-Hill Science
[100] Chorin, Alexandre E.; Marsden, Jerrold E. (1993), A Mathematical
Introduction to Fluid Mechanics, pp. 33.
[101] Christodoulou, Demetrios (2007). The Euler Equations of Compressible
Fluid Flow. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society. 44 (4): 581–602.
[102] Niels N. Sorensen, B. Mendez (2016), CFD code comparison for 2D airfoil
flows, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 753, 082019, The Science of Making
Torque from Wind
[103] J.J.Monaghan, J.B.Kajtar (2014) Leonardo da Vinci’s turbulent tank in two
dimensions, European Journal of Mechanics - B/Fluids, Volume 44, pp. 1-9
[104] Boussinesq, J. (1877) Essai sur la theorie des eaux courantes. Memoires
presentes par divers savants a l’Academie des Sciences de l’Institut National de
France, Tome XXIII, No 1. Imprimerie Nationale, Paris.
[105] O. Reynolds (1894). On the dynamical theory of turbulent incompressible
viscous fluids and the determination of the criterion, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. London A
186, 123–161.
[106] Ching Jen Chen; Shenq-Yuh Jaw (1998), Fundamentals of turbulence
modeling, Taylor & Francis
[107] G. T. Chapman and M. Tobak (1985). Observation, Theoretical Ideas, and
Modeling of Turbulent Flows – Past, Present and Future, in Theoretical Approaches
to Turbulence, Dwoyer et al (eds), Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 19-49
[108] A. N. Kolmogorov (1942). Equations of turbulent motion of an
incompressible turbulent fluid, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Phys. VI, No. 1–2
[109] J. Rotta (1951). Statistische Theorie Nichthomogener Turbulenz, Zeitsch
f¨ur Physik 129 and 131
[110] B. E. Launder, G. J. Reece and W. Rodi (1975). Progress in the development
of Reynolds-stress turbulence closure, J. Fluid Mech. 68, 537–566, 1975.
[111] C. Gacherieu, C. Weber (1998), Assesment of algebraic and one-equation
134
turbulence models for transonic turbulent flow around a full aircraft

configuration, AIAA Paper 98-32457..
[112] Adrian, R (2000). Analysis and Interpretation of instantaneous turbulent
velocity fields. Experiments in Fluids. 29: 275–29
[113] Pietro Catalano, Marcello Amato (2003), An evaluation of RANS
turbulence modelling for aerodynamic applications, Aerospace Science and
Technology Volume 7, Issue 7, pp. 493-509
[114] David C Wilcox (1993). Turbulence modeling for CFD. DCW Industries
[115] J. E. Bardina, P. G. Huang, (1997) T. J. Coakley Turbulence modeling
validation, testing, and development, NASA Technical Memorandum 110446
[116] Ma Li, Lu Lipeng, Fang Jian , Wang Qiuhui (2014), A study on turbulence
transportation and modification of Spalart-Allmaras model for shock-
wave/turbulent boundary layer interaction flow, Chinese Journal of Aeronautics
27(2) ·April 2014
[117] The Boussinesq Approximation, multiphysics Cyclopedia (c) 2018,
https://www.comsol.kr/multiphysics/boussinesq-approximation
[118] George H.F., Qureshi F. (2013) Newton’s Law of Viscosity, Newtonian and
Non-Newtonian Fluids. In: Wang Q.J., Chung YW. (eds) Encyclopedia of Tribology.
Springer, Boston, MA
[119] F. R. Menter (1994), Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for
Engineering Applications, AIAA Journal, Vol 32, No.8, August 1994
[120] F.SLienM.ALeschziner (1994), Assessment of turbulence-transport models
including non-linear rng eddy-viscosity formulation and second-moment closure
for flow over a backward-facing step, Computers & Fluids Volume 23, Issue 8,
November 1994, pp. 983-1004
[121] Sebastien Deck, Philppe Duveau,Paulo d’Espiney, Philippe Guillen (2002)
Development and application of Spalart-Allmaras one equation turbulence model
to three-dimensional supersonic complex configurations, Aerospace Science and
Technology 6 (2002) 171–183, Elsevier
[122] Magdi Ragheb and Adam M. Ragheb (2011). Wind Turbines Theory - The
Betz Equation and Optimal Rotor Tip Speed Ratio, Fundamental and Advanced
Topics in Wind Power, book edited by Rupp Carriveau, ISBN 978-953-307-508-2
135
[123] Le Gouriérès Désiré (1982). Wind Power Plants, Theory and Design,
Pergamon Press
[124] Wayne Johnson (2013), Rotorcraft Aeromechanics, Cambridge University
Press.
[125] Ali Al-abadi (2014), Novel Strategies for Aerodynamic Performance
Improvement of Wind Turbines in Turbulent Flow, Doctoral Thesis, FAU Erlangen-
Nuernberg, Institute of Fluid Mechanics.
[126] Babinsky Holger (2003), How do wings work?, Physics Education 38 497
[127] A. van Garrel (2003), Development of a wind turbine aerodynamics
simulation module, ECN-C-03-079
[128] A. van Garrel (1999), Requirements for a Wind Turbine Aerodynamics
Simulation Module, ECNC– 01-099
[129] Prandtl, Ludwig (1918). Königliche Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu
Göttingen, ed. Tragflügeltheorie
[130] Katz and A. Plotkin (2001). Low Speed Aerodynamics. Cambridge
University Press.
[131] H. Späth (1973). Spline-Algorithmen zur Konstruktion glatter Kurven und
Flächen, R. Oldenbourg Verlag
[132] Fluids- Lecture 6 Notes - MIT,
http://web.mit.edu/16.unified/www/SPRING/fluids/Spring2008/LectureNotes/f
06.pdf
[133] MJ Churchfield (2012), A Large-Eddy Simulation Study of Wake
Propagation and Power, NREL
[134] Sven G. Hedman (1965), Vortex lattice method for calculation of quasi
steady state loadings of thin elastic wings in subsonic flow, The Aeronautical
Research Institute of Sweden, report 105
[135] Falkner. V.M. (1946), The Accuracy of Calculations Based on Vortex Lattice
Theory, Rep. No. 9621, British A.R.C.
[136] Muhammad Hamid Mughal, Li Guojie (2015), Review of Pitch Control for
Variable Speed Wind Turbine,IEEE, Ubiquitous Intelligence and Computing and
2015 IEEE 12th Intl Conf on Autonomic and Trusted Computing
136
[137] Benjamin Biegel, Morten Juelsgaard, Matt Kraning, Stephen Boyd, Jakob
Stoustrup (2011), Wind turbine pitch optimization, IEEE, Control Applications
(CCA), 2011 IEEE International Conference
[138] M. Ragheb (2016), Control of Wind Turbines, URL: https://netfiles. uiuc.
edu/mragheb/www/NPRE, 2008 - mragheb.com
[139] Dimitris Bourlis (2011). A Complete Control Scheme for Variable Speed
Stall Regulated Wind Turbines, Fundamental and Advanced Topics in Wind Power,
Dr. Rupp Carriveau (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-307-508-2, InTech
[140] E. Muljadi, K. Pierce, P. Migliore (1998), Control Strategy for Variable-
Speed, Stall-Regulated Wind Turbines, June 24–26, NREL/CP-500-24311
[141] Zhe Chen (2009), A Review of the State of the Art of Power Electronics for
Wind Turbines, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON POWER ELECTRONICS, VOL. 24, NO. 8,
AUGUST 2009
[142] Matthew Dale Lennie (2013), Development of the QFEM Solver, Master of
Science Thesis, Master’s Thesis undertaken at the Technical University of Berlin
[143] A Craig Hansen (2002), User’s GUIDE to the Wind Turbine Aerodynamics
Computer Software, Technical Report, Windward Engineering, 2002.
[144] Angus Johnson (2013). Clipper – an open source freeware polygon
clipping library, URL http://www.angusj.com/delphi/clipper.php
[145] Scott Michael Larwood (2009), Dynamic Analysis Tool Development for
Advanced Geometry Wind Turbine Blades, Ph.D. dissertation, University of
California
[146] Menter, F. R. (1993), ‘‘Zonal Two Equation k-v Turbulence Models for
Aerodynamic Flows,’’ AIAA paper 93-2906.
[147] Schreck S. (2007) Rotationally augmented flow structures and time
varying loads on turbine blades. 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and
Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, January 8-11, 2007
[148] C. P. Butterfield, E. N. Nelsen (1990), Aerodynamic Testing of a Rotating
Wind Turbine Blade, Solar Energy Research Institute, U.S. Department of Energy,
Contract No. DE-AC02-93CH10093
137
[149] Youjin Kim, Ali Al-Abadi, Antonio Delgado (2016), Strategic Blade Shape
Optimization for Aerodynamic Performance Improvement of Wind Turbines,
Conference: ASME Turbo EXPO 2016, At Seoul, South Korea
[150] Simflow CFD software https://sim-flow.com/
[151] Openfoam, the opensource CFD toolbox https://www.openfoam.com/
[152] P. S. Veers (1998), Three-dimensional wind simulation, SANDIA Report,
SAND88-0152, UC-261
[153] Yuwei Li, Kwang-jun Paik, Tao Xing, Pablo M. Carrica (2012), Dynamic
overset CFD simulations of wind turbine aerodynamics, Renewable Energy 37
(2012) 285-298
[154] Sommers D.M (1997), Design and Experimental Results for the S809
Airfoil, Tech. rep., National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
[155] Emmanuel Branlard (2011), Wind turbine tip-loss corrections: Review,
implementation and investigation of new models, Master's Thesis Riso-DTU,
Siemens
[156] Dan M. Somers (1997), Design and Experimental Results for the S809
Airfoil, NREL/SR-440-6918
[157] Loving, Donald L and Katzoff, S. (1959), The Fluorescent-Oil Film Method
and Other Techniques for Boundary-Layer Flow Visualization. NASA MEMO 3-17-
59L
[158] Y. Kim, A. Al-Abadi, A. Delgado (2017), CFD stall investigation of novel
airfoil design for HAWT compared with measurements of wind tunnel experiment,
German Association for Laser Anemometry GALA e.V, At Karlsruhe, Germany,
ISBN 978-3-9816764-3-3
[159] von Mises, R. (1913). Mechanik der festen Körper im plastisch
deformablen Zustand. Göttin. Nachr. Math. Phys., vol. 1, pp. 582–592.
[160] S. M. A. Kazimi (1982) Solid Mechanics. Tata McGraw-Hill ISBN
0074517155
[161] Ali Al-Abadi, Youjin Kim, O Ertunc, Antonio Delgado (2016), Turbulence
impact on wind turbines: Experimental investigations on a wind turbine model,
Journal of Physics Conference Series 753(3) ·January 2016
138
[162] G. Bir and P. Migliore (2004), Preliminary Structural Design of Composite

Blades for Two- and Three-Blade Rotors, NREL, NREL/TP-500-31486
[163] Cristina Rebollo Mugueta (2014), Modelling, Analysis and Options for
Improvement of Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine Design, Master of Engineering
thesis, TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY – SOFIA
[164] Young Mo Koo (2012), Performance Comparison of Two Airfoil Rotor
Designs for an Agricultural Unmanned Helicopter, Journal of Biosystems
Engineering 2012; 37(1): 1-10.
[165] F. Grasso (2011), Design and Optimization of Tidal Turbine Airfoil, 29th
AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference
[166] Abdulla, Hasan (2018), Effect of Gap between Airfoil and Enbedded
Rotating Cylinder on the Airfoil Aerodynamic Performance, Crimson Publishers,
ISSN 2576-8840
[167] Schlichting, Gersten (2017), Boundary-Layer Theory, Springer-Verlag
Berlin Heidelberg 2017, DOI 10.1007/978-3-662-52919-5_2
[168] Frank M. White, Fluid Mechanics 7th Edition, McGraw-Hill series
[169] Manyonge, Shichikha, Sang, Chepkwony (2012), An Estimate of Velocity
Profile in Laminar Boundary Layer, International Electronic Journal of Pure and
Applied Mathematics, Volume 4 No. 4 2012, 285-295
[170] Van der Hegge Zijnen (1924), Measurements of the velocity distribution in
the boundary layer along a plane surface, TU Delft, Doctoral Thesis
[171] Kline, Reynolds, Schraub, Runstadler (1967), The structure of turbulent
boundary layers, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol.30, part 4, pp.741-773
[172] AE Von Doenhoff (1949), Present Status of Research on Boundary-layer
Control, NACA,Langley Field, VA, United States, NACA-RM-L8J29
[173] Moghaddam, Neishabouri (2017), On the Active and Passive Flow
Separation Control Techniques over Airfoils, IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science
and Engineering 248
[174] Carlo Cossu, L. Brandt (2002). Stabilization of Tollmien-Schlichting waves
by finite amplitude optimal streaks in the Blasius boundary layer. Physics of Fluids,
American Institute of Physics, 2002, 14 (8)
139
[175] Cebeci, Mosinkis, Smith (1970), Calculation of Viscous Drag and Turbulent
Boundary Layer Separation on Two-Dimensional and Axisymmetric Bodies in
Incompressible Flows, Naval Ship Research and Development Center, Douglas
Aircraft Company
[176] Narasimha, Prasad (1994), Leading edge shape for flat plate boundary
layer studies, Experiments in Fluids (1994) 17: 358.
[177] Rhie, Chow (1983), Numerical Study of the Turbulent Flow Past an Airfoil
with Trailing Edge Separation, AIAA Journal, Vol.21, No.11
[178] Zhang, Cheng, Gao, Qamar, Samtaney (2015), Geometrical effects on the
airfoil flow separation and transition, Computers & Fluids Volume 116, 15 August
2015, pp. 60-73
[179] A. Crivellini (2014), Study of laminar separation bubble on low Reynolds
number operating airfoils: RANS modelling by means of an high-accuracy solver
and experimental verification, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 501 012024
[180] M. Jahanmiri (2011), Laminar Separation Bubble: Its Structure, Dynamics
and Control, CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, ISSN 1652-8549
[181] M. Serdar Genç, Karasu, Açıkel, Akpolat (2012), Low Reynolds Number
Flows and Transition, Journal of Aerospace Engineering, DOI: 10.5772/31131
[182] S. S. Diwan and O. N. Ramesh (2007), Laminar separation bubbles:
Dynamics and control, Sadhana Vol. 32, Parts 1 & 2, February–April 2007, pp. 103–
109.
[183] Gaster (1969), The Structure and Behaviour of Separation Bubbles,
Aeronautical Research Council Reports and Memoranda, Replaces NPL Aero.
Report 1181 (Revised)A.R.C. 28 226.
[184] Kerho, Bragg (1997), Airfoil Boundary-Layer Development and Transition
with Large Leading Edge Roughness, AIAA JOURNAL Vol. 35, No. 1
[185] Rainer Groh (2016), Boundary Layer Separation and Pressure Drag, in
AERODYNAMICS, BIO-MIMICRY, ENGINEERING,
[186] R. L. Simpson (1996), Aspects of Turbulent Boundary Layer Separation,
Proc. Aerospace Sci. Vol. 32, pp. 457-521, 1996
[187] Th. Bäck, D.B. Fogel, and Z. Michalewicz (1997), Handbook of Evolutionary
Computation, ISBN 0750303921
140
[188] Kostic (2015), Review of the Spalart-Allmaras Turbulence Model and its
Modifications to Three-Dimensional Supersonic Configurations, Scientific
Technical Review, 2015, Vol.65,No.1,pp.43-49
[189] Bruno Chanetz (2017), A century of wind tunnels since Eiffel, Comptes
Rendus Mécanique, Volume 345, Issue 8, pp. 581-594
[190] Lee, Soy, Huque, Kommalapati and Han (2017), Effect on Torque and
Thrust of the Pointed Tip Shape of a Wind Turbine Blade, Energies 10(1):79
[191] C. Lindenburg (2003), Investigation into Rotor Blade Aerodynamics, ECN-
C—03-025
[192] G. Desena (2012), Pressure Distribution on an Airfoil (Version2), United
States Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland
[193] R. Rooij, W.A., Timmer (2003), Roughness Sensitivity Considerations for
Thick Rotor Blade Airfoils, Journal of Solar Energy Engineering, ASME, Vol. 125
[194] R. Ruess Ramsay, M.J. Hoffmann, G.M. Gregorek (1995), Effects of Grit
Roughness and Pitch Oscillation on the S809 Airfoil, NREL/TP-442-7817:
Colorado, U.S, pp. B-37
[195] LIC: Acceleration, Animation, and Zoom.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.55.3636
[196] Simflow Airfoil tutorial http://sim-flow.com/tutorials/airfoil-naca-0012/
[197] FLUENT, Near-Wall Mesh Guidlines for the SA model.
http://jullio.pe.kr/fluent6.1/help/html/ug/node456.htm
[198] D. Zhou, Y. Liu, X. Wen, L. Lu (2012), Modification of SA model for
predicting airfoil flow separation, Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and
Astronautics 38(10):1384-1388
[199] O. Guerri, K. Bouhadef, A. Harhad (2006), Turbulent Flow Simulation of
the NREL S809 Airfoil, Wind Engineering Vol. 30, No.4, pp. 287-302
[200] A. Shelton, J. Abras, R. Jurenko, M. J. Smith (2016), Improving the CFD
predictions of airfoils in stall, AIAA, DOI:10.2514/6.2005-1227
[201] Menter, F. R. (1994). Two-Equation Eddy-Viscosity Turbulence Models for
Engineering Applications, AIAA Journal, 32 (8): 1598–1605
[202] Menter, F. R. (1993), Zonal Two Equation k-ω Turbulence Models for
Aerodynamic Flows, AIAA Paper 93-2906.
141
Chapter 7: Appendices
7 APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 S809GX COORDINATES ................................................................................... 143
APPENDIX 2 ROTOR BLADE TABLE ...................................................................................... 147
APPENDIX 3 OPENFOAM DIRECTORY 0 .............................................................................. 148
APPENDIX 4 RFOIL RESULTS ............................................................................................... 152
APPENDIX 5 BASELINE COMPUTER ...................................................................................... 154
142
APPENDIX 1 S809GX COORDINATES

1 0
0.99609 0.00254
0.98021 0.00667
0.96805 0.0091
0.95344 0.01185
0.93651 0.01492
0.92604 0.01682
0.91779 0.0183
0.89737 0.0219
0.87567 0.02592
0.85303 0.03005
0.82965 0.03449
0.80584 0.03904
0.78161 0.04391
0.75717 0.04888
0.73252 0.05407
0.70786 0.05946
0.68321 0.06497
0.65855 0.07047
0.6339 0.07608
0.60914 0.08158
0.58798 0.08602
0.58449 0.08676
0.55983 0.09174
0.53508 0.09618
0.51042 0.1002
0.48577 0.10359
0.46101 0.10623
0.43636 0.10824
143
0.4117 0.10941
0.38694 0.10994
0.36229 0.10972
0.33764 0.10888
0.31288 0.10729
0.28822 0.10507
0.26357 0.10232
0.23902 0.09883
0.21469 0.0948
0.19046 0.09025
0.16665 0.08507
0.14337 0.07936
0.12083 0.07322
0.09935 0.06655
0.07915 0.05946
0.07364 0.05745
0.06063 0.05206
0.04402 0.04444
0.02973 0.0365
0.01799 0.02846
0.00899 0.02042
0.00296 0.01238
0 0.00444
0.00021 -.00339
0.0036 -0.0109
0.01005 -0.0182
0.01947 -.02518
0.03164 -.03185
0.04624 -0.0382
0.06317 -.04433
0.07364 -.04761
144
0.0819 -.05015
0.10232 -.05566
0.12401 -.06105
0.14665 -.06613
0.17003 -0.071
0.19384 -.07555
0.21807 -.07967
0.24251 -.08348
0.26717 -.08666
0.29182 -0.0893
0.31647 -.09131
0.34113 -.09258
0.36578 -.09311
0.39054 -.09301
0.4117 -.09227
0.41519 -.09216
0.43985 -.09068
0.46461 -.08867
0.48926 -.08602
0.51391 -.08306
0.53867 -.07967
0.56333 -.07597
0.58798 -.07195
0.61274 -.06782
0.63739 -.06338
0.66205 -.05894
0.68681 -.05428
0.71146 -.04962
0.73611 -.04507
0.76415 -.03978
0.785 -.03598
145
0.80923 -.03174
0.83303 -.02762
0.85631 -.02381
0.90033 -.01704
0.92054 -.01407
0.92604 -.01333
0.93905 -.01153
0.95567 -.00921
0.96995 -0.0072
0.9817 -0.0054
0.99069 -0.0037
0.99672 -.00222
1 0
146
APPENDIX 2 ROTOR BLADE TABLE

Radial Chord Twist [deg] Pitch Thread Airfoil
Position [m] length [m] Axis offset [m] Axis in [% chord]
5.08E-01 2.18E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 Circular
6.60E-01 2.18E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 Circular

8.83E-01 1.83E-01 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 Circular
1.01E+00 3.49E-01 6.70E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 Circular
1.07E+00 4.41E-01 9.90E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 Circular
1.13E+00 5.44E-01 1.34E+01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 Circular

1.26E+00 7.37E-01 2.00E+01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
1.34E+00 7.28E-01 1.81E+01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)

1.51E+00 7.11E-01 1.43E+01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
1.65E+00 6.97E-01 1.19E+01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
1.95E+00 6.66E-01 7.98E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)

2.26E+00 6.36E-01 5.31E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
2.34E+00 6.27E-01 4.71E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
2.56E+00 6.05E-01 3.42E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
2.87E+00 5.74E-01 2.08E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
3.17E+00 5.43E-01 1.15E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)

3.19E+00 5.42E-01 1.12E+00 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
3.48E+00 5.12E-01 4.94E-01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)

3.78E+00 4.82E-01 -1.50E-02 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
4.02E+00 4.57E-01 -3.81E-01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)

4.09E+00 4.51E-01 -4.75E-01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
4.39E+00 4.20E-01 -9.20E-01 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)

4.70E+00 3.89E-01 -1.35E+0 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
4.78E+00 3.81E-01 -1.47E+0 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
5.00E+00 3.58E-01 -1.78E+0 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
5.31E+00 3.28E-01 -2.19E+0 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)

5.53E+00 3.05E-01 -2.50E+0 0.00E+00 2.50E-01 s809(gx)
147
APPENDIX 3 OPENFOAM DIRECTORY 0

(1) P file
Inlet
{
Type freestreamPressure;
}
exit
{
type freestreamPressure;
}
top
{
}
bottom
{
}
airfoil
{
type zeroGradient;
}
front
{
type empty;
}
back
{
type empty;
}
148
(2) U file (𝑈𝑥 ,𝑈𝑦 and 𝑈𝑧 are the velocity for each 𝑥, 𝑦 and 𝑧 coordinate)
Inlet
{
type freestream;
freestreamValue uniform (𝑼𝒙 𝑼𝒚 𝑼𝒛 );
}
exit
{
type freestream;
}
bottom
{
type freestream;
}
top
{
type freestream;
}
airfoil
{
type fixedValue;
value uniform (𝟎 𝟎 𝟎);
}
front
type empty;
}
back
{
type empty;}
149
(3) nut file (0.14 is the distortion level at the upstream)

Inlet
{
type freestream;
freestreamValue uniform 0.14;
}
exit
{
type freestream;
}
bottom
{
type freestream;
}
top
{
type freestream;
}
airfoil
{
type nutUspaldingWallFunction;
value uniform 0;
}
front
type empty;
}
back
{
type empty;}
150
(4) nuTilda file

Inlet
{
type freestream;
}
exit
{
type freestream;
}
bottom
{
type freestream;
}
top
{
type freestream;
}
airfoil
{
type fixedValue;
value uniform 0;
}
Front
{
type empty;
}
back
{
type empty;
}
151
APPENDIX 4 RFOIL RESULTS

Cl distributions versus angle of attack
152
Transition points at different flow conditions, Middle (Re 850000)

S809_S, S stands for the suction side
S809_P, P stands for the pressure side
Root (Re 550000)
Tip (Re 950000)
153
APPENDIX 5 BASELINE COMPUTER

Computer 1
Computer 2
154

Sprache

Omputational Airfoil Optimization For The Improvement of The Performance of Orizontal XIS IND Urbines With A Model

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Omputational Airfoil Optimization For The Improvement of The Performance of Orizontal XIS IND Urbines With A Model

Originaltitel:

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

COMPUTATIONAL AIRFOIL OPTIMIZATION FOR

THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE PERFORMANCE OF

HORIZONTAL AXIS WIND TURBINES (HAWT)

COMPUTERGESTÜTZTE TRAGFLÄCHENOPTIMIERUNG ZUR

Der Technischen Fakultät

Tag der Mündliche Prüfung: 8th November 2019

Vorsitzender der Promotionsorgans: Prof. Dr.-Ing. habil. Andreas Paul Fröba

Busan, 7th May, 2020

The usage of wind turbines as an alternative source of energy is increasing

Die Nutzung von Windkraftanlagen als alternative Energiequelle erfährt einen

TABLE 2. THE MAIN M.FILE OF GA OPTIMIZATION ...............................................................85

FIGURE 9. AIRFOIL FOR WIND TURBINE .................................................................................34

FIGURE 23. VELOCITY TRIANGLE AT THE (Z, 𝜣) PLANE [42] .............................................68

FIGURE 26. BIRD BEAKS IN NATURAL SELECTION AND AIRFOIL SHAPE IN GA

FIGURE 45. 𝑪𝒑 OF S809 AND S809GX WITH EXPERIMENT [154] AT ALPHA=1°..........92

FIGURE 46. 𝑪𝒑 OF S809 AND S809GX WITH EXPERIMENT[154] AT ALPHA=5.2° .......93

FIGURE 47. 𝑪𝒑 OF S809 AND S809GX WITH EXPERIMENTAL RESULT [154] AT

FIGURE 81. VELOCITY LIC OF AIRFOIL S809 AT ALPHA=12.2° .................................... 119

FIGURE 82. VELOCITY LIC OF AIRFOIL S809GX AT ALPHA=12.2° ................................ 119

FIGURE 86. VELOCITY LIC AT AIRFOIL S809 AT ALPHA=20° ........................................ 122

FIGURE 87. VELOCITY LIC AT AIRFOIL S809GX AT ALPHA=20° ................................... 122

APPENDIX 1 S809GX COORDINATES ................................................................................... 143

1.1 Wind Energy

Figure 2. Wind Energy among different renewable energy sources [3]

Figure 3. Installed Capacity [MW] of the nations, WWEA [4]

Based on the previously discussed usefulness of wind energy, innovative

1.2 Airfoil Design

optimized by Grasso [18]. High aerodynamic effectiveness, insensitivity to the

Figure 4. Windmill of John Smeaton [6, 7]

Figure 5. Bird wing inspiration to Otto Lilienthal [8]

Figure 6. Airfoil families [12]

1.3 Numerical Methods

were also applied for considering additional effects on rotational performance

Figure 7. Computer codes used in wind turbine design [21]

Codes for 3D rotation

Codes for airfoil optimization

The Genetic Algorithm (GA) is another important non-gradient optimization

results of aerodynamic simulations show the force distribution [72], flow in a

2.1 Wind Turbine Airfoil

Figure 9. Airfoil for wind turbine

2.1.2 Fluid flow over an airfoil

respectively, are related to the characteristics of 𝛼, 𝑅𝑒 and 𝑀𝑎 [21].

Figure 10. Airfoil parameters for aerodynamics [77]

𝐔𝜹𝟏 (𝒙) = ∫ (𝐔 − 𝐮)𝐝𝐲 (5)

Boundary layer control

Boundary layer separation

Figure 11. Laminar Separation Bubble (LSB) structure [180]

Airfoil boundary layer

Figure 12. Airfoil boundary layer and separation [167]

2.1.3 Genetic algorithm optimization

a population-based selecting process, which shows higher effectiveness and

Figure 13. Allele concept of particulate genes of Mendel [62]

The particulate gene concept of Mendel needs to be explained for a deeper

Figure 14. Gene structure from chromosome and cell [63]

Although genes can be saved in different chromosomes in real biology, the

A spline function consists of connected polynomial pieces of specific smoothness

(1) The domain of F is in the interval [𝑎, 𝑏]

⋯ < 𝒕−𝟐 < 𝒕−𝟏 < 𝒕𝟎 < 𝒕𝟏 < 𝒕𝟐 < ⋯

𝑺(𝒙) = 𝒃𝒊 , 𝐢𝐟 𝒕𝒊 ≤ 𝒙 < 𝒕𝒊+𝟏 (13)

Then S can be written as

Where k = 1, 2, …and i = 0, ±1, ±2. The detailed derivation of B-spline