19.06.2015 Views

WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS - Cd3wd

WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS - Cd3wd

WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS - Cd3wd

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 1—Introduction 1–10<br />

TABLE 1.1 Specifications of ERDA and DOE<br />

Two-Bladed Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbines<br />

MOD-0 MOD-0A MOD-1 MOD-2<br />

Rotor r/min 40 40 34.7 17.5<br />

Generator output power (kW) 100 200 2000 2500<br />

Rotor coefficient of performance, C p,max 0.375 0.375 0.375 0.382<br />

Cut-in wind speed at hub height (m/s) 4.3 5.4 7.0 6.3<br />

Rated wind speed at hub height (m/s) 7.7 9.7 14.6 12.4<br />

Shutdown wind speed at hub height (m/s) 17.9 17.9 19.0 20.1<br />

Maximum wind speed (m/s) 66 67 66 66<br />

Rotor diameter (m) 37.5 37.5 61 91.5<br />

Hub height (m) 30 30 46 61<br />

Coning angle 7 o 7 o 12 o 0 o<br />

Effective swept area (m 2 ) 1072 1140 2920 6560<br />

Airfoil section, NACA- 23,000 23,000 44XX 230 XX<br />

Weight of two blades (kg) 2090 2090 16,400 33,200<br />

Generator voltage, line to line 480 480 4160 4160<br />

The gearbox and generator were similar in design to those of the MOD-0A, except larger.<br />

The tower was a steel, tubular truss design. The General Electric Company, Space Division, of<br />

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania was the prime contractor for designing, fabricating, and installing<br />

the MOD-1. The Boeing Engineering and Construction Company of Seattle, Washington,<br />

manufactured the two steel blades.<br />

As the MOD-1 design effort progressed, it became clear that the MOD-1 would be relatively<br />

heavy and costly and could not lead to a cost competitive production unit. Weight and cost<br />

were being determined by a number of factors, the most significant of which were the stiff tower<br />

design criteria, the full span pitch control which required complicated, heavy mechanisms and<br />

excessive space in the hub area, and a heavy bedplate supporting the weight on top of the<br />

tower. A number of possible improvements in the design became evident too late to be<br />

included in the actual construction. Only one machine was built because of the predicted<br />

production costs. Like the MOD-0, it was operated as a test unit to help the designs of later<br />

generation turbines.<br />

One early problem with the MOD-1 was the production of subaudible vibrations which<br />

would rattle the windows of nearby houses. The rotor would interact with the tower to produce<br />

two pulses per revolution, which resulted in a vibration frequency of about 1.2 Hz. Techniques<br />

used to reduce the annoyance included reducing the speed of rotation and replacing the steel<br />

blades with fiberglass blades. Other operational problems, including a broken low speed shaft,<br />

plus a reduction in federal funding, caused the MOD-1 to be disassembled in 1982.<br />

The next machine in the series, the MOD-2, represented an effort to build a truly cost<br />

competitive machine, incorporating all the information gained from the earlier machines. It<br />

was a second generation machine with the Boeing Engineering and Construction Company<br />

Wind Energy Systems by Dr. Gary L. Johnson November 20, 2001

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!