The Effect of Wind Turbine Wake on Power Output

For Two Model Turbines Separated by up to Five Rotor Diameters in a

Wind Tunnel

By
Thomas Turner

College of Engineering, Mathematics and Physical Sciences

University of Exeter
08/12/2017
 1

Abstract
This report aims to investigate the effect of turbine wake on the power output of a wind turbine, by varying the
separation between them; then to identify the length of the near wake region. The experiment is performed in a wind
tunnel of dimensions 1m x 0.5m x 0.5m. Two wind turbines are 3D printed of rotor diameter 0.200m and height
0.200m. An aerodynamic stand is designed to reduce its interference with the wake. Measurements of coefficient of
power and tip-speed ratio are made, in order to produce a characteristic graph for the turbine which is later compared
to one of full scale. The turbine had a maximum efficiency of 1.08 ± 0.04% at a tip-speed ratio of 1.99 ± 0.05.
Measurements of power output with respect to turbine separation are performed from 0.10 to 5.00 rotor diameters,
at 0.30 rotor diameter intervals. Power output decreased as turbine separation increased in the near wake region and
both periodic and random fluctuations in power output were observed. The near wake regime ended between 3.40
± 0.04 rotor diameters and 3.70 ± 0.04 rotor diameters. At the near wake edge, power output dropped to as low as
48.8 ± 1.3% of its maximum power output. In the far wake regime, power output increased with increasing turbine
separation, however only three data points could be measured. Jensen’s model did not fit the results in this regime.
 2

C ONTENTS

I Introduction 3

II Theory 3
II-A Understanding Wake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
II-B Near Wake Regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
II-B1 Vortices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
II-B2 A cylindrical vortex system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
II-C Far Wake Regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
II-D Tip-speed Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

III Experimental Techniques & Method 4

III-A Making The Turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
III-B Reducing Error: Power output vs. Blade angle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
III-C Coefficient of power vs. Tip-speed ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
III-D Thrust coefficient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
III-E Power output vs Turbine separation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

IV Results & Discussion 6

IV-A Coefficient of power vs. Tip-speed ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
IV-B Power output vs. Turbine separation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

V Improvements & Future Investigations 7

VI Conclusions 8

References 8

Appendix A: Deriving Power Output Equation 9

Appendix B: Optimising TSR Derivation 9

Appendix C: Error in Power Drop 9

 3

I. I NTRODUCTION
Of all renewable energy sources, wind energy is the fastest-
growing sector in terms of installed capacity [1]. Wind turbines
are an increasingly important energy source for the UK and are
expected to generate the majority of the 15% renewables target
by 2020 [2]. As turbines get bigger, and nameplate capacities
increase above 10MW [3], maximising their efficiency has
become more important than ever [4]. One vital consideration
when constructing an array of wind turbines is the separation
between each turbine [5]–[7].
This report aims to investigate the effect of turbine spacing
on turbine power output, by aligning two turbines perpendicu-
lar to the direction of incoming airflow separated by a distance
d. Before this is done, measurements of coefficient of power
and tip-speed ratio are performed to obtain a characteristic
graph of the turbine; which is used to compare the experiment
Fig. 1. Schematic showing the development of vortices at the blade tip. The
to a full scale turbine. pressure gradient pushes air molecules from the pressure side to the suction
side, causing tip vortices to form. More laminar flow occurs along the blade.

II. T HEORY
A. Understanding Wake 1) Vortices: The pressure just underneath the wind turbine
blade tip is higher than the pressure just above it. This forms
A wind turbine generates electricity by converting kinetic a pressure gradient and is what causes the lift effect on the
energy from incoming air molecules into a torque which rotor. The high pressure air moves over the blade tip to the
rotates the blades, which in turn, rotates a generator. The power low pressure region, causing a secondary flow. The mixing
produced by a turbine P , is defined by the equation [4], of the main flow over the blade and the secondary flow over
1 the tip generates a vortex in the region behind the blade tip
P = CP ρAU03 , (1) and causes vortices to form around the wake edge. Vortices
2
also form around the root of the blade, however due to the
where: lower axial velocity of this region, the turbulence is much less
Cp = Power coefficient compared to at the tip [11]. The root vortex counter-rotates
ρ = Density of air with respect to the direction of the turbine blades. This process
A = Rotor area is shown in Fig. 1.
U0 = Velocity of incoming air,

and is derived in Appendix A. The power coefficient, CP ,

is the ratio of power obtained from the wind to the power
available from the kinetic energy of the wind through the rotor
area. The power coefficient is ∼ 40% for an offshore turbine
[8].
As air molecules pass through the rotor, kinetic energy
is transferred to the blades, resulting in a decrease in wind
velocity behind the rotor. The air behind the rotor has been
disturbed and becomes turbulent - this disturbed air stream is
called the wake of the turbine.
The behaviour of the wake close to the turbine significantly Fig. 2. Schematic of the cylindrical vortex system generated by a three
blade HAWT, with small vortices forming around the edge. The edge vortices
differs to the behaviour far away from it [9]. This means the prevent the atmospheric flow mixing with the wake. Only spirals from two
wake can be described as two regions, the near wake regime blades are shown, for clarity.
and the far wake regime.
2) A cylindrical vortex system: The speed of the blade tip is
generally higher than the incoming wind speed, so the distance
B. Near Wake Regime
between tip vortex spirals is small [10]. The turbulent vortex
In this regime, the turbine geometry determines the shape of system can then be approximated as a cylindrical shear layer
the wake flow [10]. The near wake regime is characterised by such as in Fig. 2. A shear layer is defined as the boundary in a
three processes; the rotational motion of the blade, the wind- fluid where the velocity changes by a large amount in a short
flow outside the turbine wake and the vortices induced at the distance i.e there is a large velocity gradient. In this case, the
end of the blades [10]. wake has a low velocity compared to the faster flowing wind
 4

outside the wake. Turbulence is highest at the edge of the wake of k is semi-empirically derived to be 0.04 offshore, 0.075 for
due to the vortices. Within the cylindrical turbulent vortex open farmland and 0.117 for built up cities [15]. The thrust
system the turbulence is lower. As distance increases down coefficient CT is a dimensionless quantity and is a measure
stream, mixing between the vortices and the inner turbulence of the magnitude of thrust on the blades. It is defined as the
occurs, as shown in Fig. 3. As a result of turbulent mixing, axial thrust force divided by the dynamic force from the wind
the velocity of the near wake region decreases with increasing onto the rotor [10], which can be expressed as
distance.
The distance at which the turbulence has completely mixed Thrust force −ρAω Uω (U0 − Uω )
defines the end of the near wake regime, which is not clearly CT = = . (3)
Dynamic force 1/2ρAU02
defined. Vermeer et al. [9] and Sanderse [10] define the near
wake regime to end around 1 rotor diameter (D), whilst where:
Schepers [12] uses 2.25 D and Gomez-Elivra et al. [13] find
that the near wake ends anywhere between 2-5 D. Aω = Cross sectional area of wake
Uω = Velocity of wake at blades.

D. Tip-speed Ratio
Tip-speed ratio (TSR) λ, is the ratio of the tip speed of the
blade, to the wind speed. It is a dimensionless variable defined
as [16],

tip speed of blade v ωr

λ= = = , (4)
wind speed U0 U0

where:

Fig. 3. Schematic showing the expansion of tip vortices from the wake edge. v = tip speed of the rotor
The point where the tip vortices meet is the region of highest turbulence and ω = angular velocity of the rotor
is therefore the minimum velocity in the wake. This is the end of the near
wake region. r = rotor radius.

Along with power coefficient, it is a usual measure when

comparing the properties turbines. This experiment inves-
C. Far Wake Regime
tigates 3-bladed turbines. For a three bladed turbine, the
The turbulence in the now combined shear layer allows optimum TSR is ∼ 4.2 (Appendix B).
the slower moving wake to mix with the higher velocity air
surrounding it [10]. Momentum is transferred into the wake
which results in its expansion with increasing distance. As the III. E XPERIMENTAL T ECHNIQUES & M ETHOD
wake expands, the velocity deficit recovers.
The wake in the far regime is similar for turbines regardless A. Making The Turbine
of their geometry, so this regime is easier to model. One of the
As the experiment is focussed on wake, it was important to
most commonly used models for wake was proposed by N.
ensure the turbine and stand did not interfere with air flow.
O. Jensen in 1986 [14]. The model assumes the wake to start
A thin metal rod was used as the stand and was threaded
with a diameter equal to the turbine diameter and predicts it to
at the bottom; the threading allowed it to be screwed into a
expand linearly with increasing distance x. Within the wake,
heavy baseplate, consisting of a 20cm x 20cm grid of threaded
the velocity in the y direction (parallel to the rotor) is assumed
holes, 2cm apart. The generator was placed into a hollow metal
to be constant for value of x. The wind speed downstream of
cylinder, which could be screwed into the stand. The generator
a turbine U (x), is modelled by the equation
was secured by a top screw. The stand was purposely designed
√
to be symmetrical, reducing its interference on the shape of
 
1 − 1 − CT
U (x) = U0 1 − , (2) the wake.
1 + 2ks
The turbine hub and blades were 3D printed using Solid-
where:
Works and had rotor diameter (D) 0.200m and height 0.200m.
U (x) = wind speed x metres behind turbine The experiment’s main focus is to investigate the effect of
U0 = incoming wind speed wake on a wind turbine. It was of no interest to create the
CT = coefficient of thrust turbine to be as efficient as possible, the turbine used needed
k = wake decay coefficient to operate such that the error in power readings was small
s = distance behind turbine ÷ Diameter of rotor. compared to the output power. To ensure this, an optimization
The wake decay constant k, is a function of the turbulence of blade angle was performed in the interest of reducing error.
intensity and thus the roughness of the terrain [14]. The value

Fig. 4. Schematic showing the experimental set-up for power output vs. turbine separation, d. The circuit is shown, with R= 1Ω. The incoming laminar
wind, at speed U0 , becomes disturbed by the front turbine - causing the second turbine to generate less power. All measurements were carried out with U0
= 5ms−1 and over a 10 minute interval. The average power output and wind speed were recorded.
Fig. 5. Calibration lines drawn on the rotor hub and blades. Lines were drawn
on the hub at 0◦ , 45◦ and 90◦ ; and on the blade at ◦ . All blades were rotated
by 15◦ for each measurement of power output.
B. Reducing Error: Power output vs. Blade angle
The blades and hub were printed separately and calibration
lines were drawn on both, as seen in Fig. 5. These lines
allowed the angle of the blades to be recorded as they were
rotated in their sockets and the effect of blade angle on power
output can be measured.
Two wires were attached to the generator pins, which were
fed out of the wind tunnel through a small hole in the side.
The wires were attached to an energymeter. The energymeter
allowed both instantaneous power and average power to be
recorded. To reduce error, each measurement was performed
over 2 minutes and average power was recorded. For other
sections of this report, measurements are performed over
much longer time periods. The load resistance was found to
maximise power output at R = 1Ω in an earlier optimization.
The blades were aligned at 0◦ and placed in the wind tunnel
5
with U0 = 6ms−1 . After 2 minutes the power output was
recorded. This was repeated, rotating the blades by 15◦ for
each measurement. The maximum power was found to occur
at 20◦ .
The SolidWorks file was then edited, such that the blades
were aligned at 20◦ in the hub and the turbine was printed
as one piece. The error of each blade angle was therefore
negligible, as the precision of the 3D printer is ±100 microns.
C. Coefficient of power vs. Tip-speed ratio
The aim of this section is to to produce a graph of Cp
against TSR in order to compare the turbine’s characteristics
to one of full scale.
The turbine was fixed into the back centre hole in the
baseplate to minimise the effect of wake reflecting off the
wind tunnel walls; it was not moved throughout the rest of this
experiment. U0 was slowly increased until the cut-in speed
of the turbine is found; this was 4.2ms−1 . To find TSR a
stroboscope was set up outside the tunnel pointing at the blades
and a pen mark was made on one of the blades. When the
frequency of the flashes is equal to the frequency of blade
rotation, the turbine will appear to be stationary.
U0 was then increased in 1ms−1 increments, the average
power over a 5 minute interval was measured and the fre-
quency of the rotor was recorded. Cp and TSR were calculated
using Eq. 1 and Eq. 4 respectively. Cp was a maximum at
5ms−1 , it was decided this was the wind velocity that the wake
experiment in Sec. III-E should be performed at, in order to
maximise the power readings relative to their error.
D. Thrust coefficient
To use the Jensen Model, the thrust coefficient CT of
the turbine must be known. Eq. 3 shows that to calculate
this, the wind speed behind the rotor must be measured. An
anemometer was set up in a clamp stand such that it was
behind the turbine but the did not interfere with the wake - as
seen in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Set-up for calculating the thrust coefficient, with the anemometer
measuring the wind speed at a distance x behind turbine. The turbine is
screwed into the baseplate. The anemometer display and clamp stand are
aligned such that they do not interfere with the turbine wake.
E. Power output vs Turbine separation
To calculate the drop in power output of the turbine due to
the wake from another turbine, the unobstructed power Pmax
must first be measured.
The turbine was again placed in the centre-back position
of the baseplate and U0 was increased slowly to 5ms−1 .
Measurements begun 60s after reaching 5ms−1 , to allow the
wind to settle in the tunnel. After this, ‘average’ was pressed
on the anemometer, in order to record the average wind speed
during the measurement and readings of power output were
recorded every 60s for 10 minutes. After 10 minutes, ‘average’
is pressed again and the average wind speed and average power
Fig. 6. Plot of coefficient of power vs. tip-speed ratio. Maximum efficiency occurs at 1.08 ± 0.04% at a TSR of 1.99 ± 0.05.
6
output were noted.
After Pmax was found, the power output in turbine wake was
measured. A schematic of the set-up is displayed in Fig. 4. An
identical turbine was placed 0.1m in front of the secondary
turbine, perpendicular to the direction of the incoming wind.
The method of recording power and wind speed was repeated
as above. The baseplate was used for the first three readings,
after this a clamp stand was required to reach further distances
d. To ensure only the x location of the turbine was changed, a
line of masking tape was placed perpendicular to the baseplate;
6cm intervals were measured with a ruler and marked. The
clamp stand was placed to the side of the tunnel, such that it
did not interfere with the wake of the turbine. This experiment
was repeated twice.
IV. R ESULTS & D ISCUSSION
A. Coefficient of power vs. Tip-speed ratio
Power coefficient is plotted against tip-speed ratio in Fig. 6.
Maximum efficiency is 1.08 ± 0.04% and occurs at a TSR of
1.99 ± 0.05. The maximum efficiency of the turbine is ∼ 40
times lower than that of a full scale offshore turbine [8]; this
implies the blades and rotor are less aerodynamic than a real
turbine and one would expect more turbulence in the wake.
The maximum occurring at a TSR of 1.99 ± 0.05 is lower than
a full-scale turbine. This also implies a more turbulent wake,
as turbulence around the blades occurs at a lower rotational
speed.
The error in the average power output δPav , arises from the
yaw alignment of the turbine. The effect of variation in yaw
alignment was appropriately modelled using a cos3 θ relation-
ship [17]. Our uncertainty in yaw alignment θ was estimated
to be a maximum of ±5◦ . The propagation of error for Cp
included δPav and the resolution of the anemometer, δU0 =
0.005ms−1 . For TSR, the propagating error was calculated,
where the error in rotor radius δR = 100 microns, δU0 =
0.005ms−1 and the resolution of the stroboscope, δf = 0.5Hz.

Fig. 8. Plot of results for average power output vs turbine separation, the first data set (blue) and the repeat measurements (red). The Jensen Model predictions
are shown in grey. All measurements made at U0 = 5.00ms−1 with the average power for each data point recorded over 10 minutes. In measurement 1,
P/Pmax dropped from 67.8 ± 1.8% at d = 0.50, to 48.8 ± 1.3% at d = 3.70 ± 0.04D. In measurement 2, P/Pmax dropped from 66.5 ± 1.8% at
d = 0.50 ± 0.03D to 55.5 ± 1.5% at d = 3.40 ± 0.03D.
B. Power output vs. Turbine separation
The average wind speed in 10 minutes varied from
5.00ms−1 to 5.18ms−1 . To plot the drop in power output for
U0 = 5.00ms−1 these results needed to be normalised. The
data was normalised using the equation,
Power output
Pnormalised = × 5.00.
Wind speed
A plot of the normalised results at U0 = 5.00ms−1 is
displayed in Fig. 8. The formula for error in Pav /Pmax is shown
in Appendix C.
The minimum power output correlates to the point in the
wake with minimum velocity, and thus marks the end of the
near wake regime. The near wake regime was found to lie
between 3.40 ± 0.04 to 3.70 ± 0.04 rotor diameters behind the
turbine. This contradicts the findings of both Sanderse [10]
and Vermeer et al. [9], who find the near wake to end at 1 D.
The result agrees with Gomez-Elivra et al. [13] who proposed
that the near wake ends anywhere between 2-5 D, depending
on the design of the blades.
Within the near wake regime, both measurements show a
drop in power output with increasing distance.
In measurement 1, P/Pmax dropped from 67.8 ± 1.8% at
d = 0.50 ± 0.03D, to 48.8% ± 1.3% at d = 3.70 ± 0.04D.
In measurement 2, P/Pmax dropped from 66.5 ± 1.8% at
d = 0.50 ± 0.03D to 55.5% ± 1.5% at d = 3.40 ± 0.04D.
Although the general trend matches the theory described
of the near wake, the plot shows that the drop in power is
not linear. A random and periodic variation in power output
occurs along the general downward trend. One hypothesis for
this random variation is that the random turbulent mixing
of the tip vortices and the main wake results in random
fluctuations in wind speed. The direction of these vortices vary
7
with distance, resulting in random, more subtle changes in the
velocity gradient across the wake. This explanation matches
the findings of L. Lignarolo et al. [18], who observed both
random and periodic fluctuations in the wake profile due to
turbulent mixing within the near wake regime.
The secondary minima at ∼ 1 to 1.5 D and a secondary
maxima ∼ 2 D in Fig. 8 are evidence for periodic fluctua-
(5)
tions in power output. This is likely to be the result of the
‘leapfrogging’ mechanism of vortices, which has been studied
in great depth [19]–[21]. One would hypothesise that from ∼
0 to 1.5 D the vortices in the wake are aligned such that the
kinetic energy is travelling outwards of the wake. As a result,
less kinetic energy is transferred to the turbine blades and
power output is reduced. A leapfrogging event occurs when
the direction of the vortex rotates by 90◦ rapidly. The vortex
is now aligned such that kinetic energy is transported towards
the centre of the wake, increasing the kinetic energy at the
turbine blades and increasing power output.
After 3.40 ± 0.04D to 3.70 ± 0.04D, power output increases
with distance - as predicted by the Jensen model. However,
the model over-predicts P/Pmax by ∼ 15%. This is likely
because the data points are at the boundary of the near and
far regime. M. Felli et al. [22] propose a transition regime
between the near and far wake, which exhibits a mixture of
the properties of each regime. This is a likely explanation for
the disagreement between the model and results in an under
prediction of the wind velocity, as some turbulence from the
near wake regime remains.
V. I MPROVEMENTS & F UTURE I NVESTIGATIONS
The turbine structure should be improved to better reflect
the design of a full scale turbine. The clamp stand in the ex-
periment, although symmetric, had a bulky cylindrical socket

for the generator. The cylinder should be made less thick and
the screw made smaller - this would reduce the area blocking
wind flow and improve the validity of the comparison to full-
scale turbines.
A wider and longer tunnel would allow power output
measurements of a whole array to be investigated, which is
more appropriate for large-scale wind turbine research. The
angle of attack and arrangement of the array can also be varied
and the power output of each turbine recorded. Furthermore,
a longer wind tunnel would allow a greater comparison to the
Jensen models wake prediction, as the current range allowed
only 3-4 data points to be investigated in the far wake regime.
To test the hypothesis of the periodic fluctuations in power
output with downstream distance, particle image velocimetry
(PIV) [23] should be used in the wake between the turbines.
Cross-sectional maps of the wake profile velocity could be
produced [24]–[28] and the leapfrogging hypothesis could be
tested.
Future experiments investigating power output as a function
of turbine separation should repeat measurements for a range
of velocities. The relationship between the length of the near
wake and incoming wind speed, if any, could be investigated.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, it was found that the turbine had a maximum
efficiency of 1.08 ± 0.04% at a tip-speed ratio of 1.99 ± 0.05.
Two distinct regions of wake were observed. In the near
wake region, power output decreased with increasing turbine
separation. The near wake regime ended between 3.40 ± 0.04
rotor diameters to 3.70 ± 0.04 rotor diameters behind the
turbine. At the near wake edge, power output dropped to
between 48.8 ± 1.3% and 55.5 ± 1.5% of its maximum power
output.
A periodic and random fluctuation in the power output
was observed as turbine separation increased, which could
be a result of leapfrogging within the wake, however further
evidence is needed before this can be concluded. The velocity
profile of the wake must be recorded to confirm this theory,
possibly using particle image velocimetry. The length of the
wind tunnel meant only 3 data points were measured in the far
wake region. The experiment should be improved by repeating
measurements in a longer tunnel and investigating the distance
required for the turbine to return to its maximum power output.
R EFERENCES
[1] Pierre Tchakoua, René Wamkeue, Mohand Ouhrouche, Fouad Slaoui-
Hasnaoui, Tommy Andy Tameghe, and Gabriel Ekemb. Wind turbine
condition monitoring: State-of-the-art review, new trends, and future
challenges. Energies, 7(4):2595–2630, 2014.
[2] Department of Energy and Climate Change. Uk renewable energy
roadmap. Low carbon technologies and UK energy security, pages 4–6,
2013.
[3] American Superconductor Corporation. Seatitan 10 mw wind turbine.
Windtec Solutions, 2017.
[4] James F Manwell, Jon G McGowan, and Anthony L Rogers. Wind
energy explained: theory, design and application. John Wiley & Sons,
2010.
[5] Nak Joon Choi, Sang Hyun Nam, Jong Hyun Jeong, and Kyung Chun
Kim. Numerical study on the horizontal axis turbines arrangement in
a wind farm: Effect of separation distance on the turbine aerodynamic
power output. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynam-
ics, 117:11–17, 2013.
8
[6] Souma Chowdhury, Jie Zhang, Achille Messac, and Luciano Castillo.
Optimizing the arrangement and the selection of turbines for wind farms
subject to varying wind conditions. Renewable Energy, 52:273–282,
2013.
[7] M. S Adaramola and P-Å Krogstad. Experimental investigation of wake
effects on wind turbine performance. Renewable Energy, 36(8):2078–
2086, 2011.
[8] U.S. DOE. 2015 wind technologies market report. Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy, 2016.
[9] L. J. Vermeer, J. N. Sørensen, and A. Crespo. Wind turbine wake
aerodynamics. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 39:467–510, October
2003.
[10] B Sanderse. Aerodynamics of wind turbine wakes. Energy Research
Center of the Netherlands (ECN), ECN-E–09-016, Petten, The Nether-
lands, Tech. Rep, 5(15):153, 2009.
[11] Wei Zhang, Corey D. Markfort, and Fernando Porté-Agel. Near-wake
flow structure downwind of a wind turbine in a turbulent boundary layer.
Experiments in Fluids, 52(5):1219–1235, May 2012.
[12] JG Schepers. ENDOW: Validation and improvement of ECN’s wake
model. Energy research Centre of the Netherlands ECN, 2003.
[13] Rafael Gómez-Elvira, Antonio Crespo, Emilio Migoya, Fernando
Manuel, and Julio Hernández. Anisotropy of turbulence in wind turbine
wakes. Journal of wind engineering and industrial aerodynamics,
93(10):797–814, 2005.
[14] I Katic, J Højstrup, and Niels Otto Jensen. A simple model for
cluster efficiency. In European wind energy association conference and
exhibition, pages 407–410, 1986.
[15] Thomas Sørensen, Morten Lybech Thøgersen, Per Nielsen, and Niels
Jernesvej. Adapting and calibration of existing wake models to meet the
conditions inside offshore wind farms. EMD International A/S. Aalborg,
2008.
[16] Magdi Ragheb and Adam M. Ragheb. Wind turbines theory - the betz
equation and optimal rotor tip speed ratio. In Rupp Carriveau, editor,
Fundamental and Advanced Topics in Wind Power, chapter 02. InTech,
Rijeka, 2011.
[17] Christoph Schulz, Patrick Letzgus, Thorsten Lutz, and Ewald Krmer.
Cfd study on the impact of yawed inflow on loads, power and near
wake of a generic wind turbine. Wind Energy, 20(2):253–268, 2017.
we.2004.
[18] F. Scarano1 C. J. Simo Ferreira1 L. E. M. Lignarolo1, D. Ragni1 and
G. J. W. van Bussel1. Tip-vortex instability and turbulent mixing in
wind-turbine wakes. J. Fluid Mech., 781:467–493, October 2015.
[19] N Riley and D P Stevens. A note on leapfrogging vortex rings. Fluid
Dynamics Research, 11(5):235, 1993.
[20] Laust Tophj and Hassan Aref. Instability of vortex pair leapfrogging.
Physics of Fluids, 25(1):014107, 2013.
[21] A Pentek, T Tel, and T Toroczkai. Chaotic advection in the velocity
field of leapfrogging vortex pairs. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical
and General, 28(8):2191, 1995.
[22] M. Felli, R. Camussi, and F. Di Felice. Mechanisms of evolution of
the propeller wake in the transition and far fields. Journal of Fluid
Mechanics, 682:553, 2011.
[23] Markus Raffel, Christian E Willert, Steven T Wereley, and Jürgen
Kompenhans. Particle image velocimetry: a practical guide. Springer,
2013.
[24] G. Tescione, D. Ragni, C. He, C.J. Simo Ferreira, and G.J.W. van Bussel.
Near wake flow analysis of a vertical axis wind turbine by stereoscopic
particle image velocimetry. Renewable Energy, 70(Supplement C):47
– 61, 2014. Special issue on aerodynamics of offshore wind energy
systems and wakes.
[25] Christian Willert. Stereoscopic digital particle image velocimetry for
application in wind tunnel flows. Measurement science and technology,
8(12):1465, 1997.
[26] F Massouh and I Dobrev. Exploration of the vortex wake behind of wind
turbine rotor. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, volume 75, page
012036. IOP Publishing, 2007.
[27] J Whale, CG Anderson, R Bareiss, and S Wagner. An experimental and
numerical study of the vortex structure in the wake of a wind turbine.
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 84(1):1–21,
2000.
[28] I Grant, M Mo, X Pan, P Parkin, J Powell, H Reinecke, K Shuang,
F Coton, and D Lee. An experimental and numerical study of the vortex
filaments in the wake of an operational, horizontal-axis, wind turbine.
Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 85(2):177–
189, 2000.
 9

A PPENDIX A
2πU0
D ERIVING P OWER O UTPUT E QUATION ωopt ≈ (15)
ns
Kinetic energy of moving air molecules of mass m, and
The optimum tip-speed ratio can then be found by substi-
velocity v is simply,
tuting the optimal rotation frequency into Eq. 4
1
Ek = mv 2 (6) ωopt r 2π  r 
2 λopt ≈ ≈ (16)
U0 n s
And the mass of the air is,
From empirical evidence, the disturbed air downwind of
a wind turbine, s, is approximately half of the rotor radius
m = ρV (7)
[16]. Putting s/r ≈ 1/2 into Eq. 16, gives an estimate of the
where ρ is the density of air and V is the volume of air. optimum tip speed for an n bladed turbine:
Combining Eq. 6 and 7 The kinetic energy of the air can 4π
be expressed as, λopt ≈ (17)
n
1 This experiment investigates 3-bladed turbines. By using
Ek = ρV v 2 (8)
2 n = 3 in Eq.17, it is shown that λopt ≈ 4.2.
The volume of air ∆V , passing through the turbine in an
interval of time ∆t is, A PPENDIX C
E RROR IN P OWER D ROP
∆V = Av∆t (9) The error in Pav /Pmax consists of the error:
Where, A is the rotor area. p
δPav = (Pav (1 − cos3 (θ)))2 (18)
1 2
Ek 2 ∆V
ρv
P = = (10) p
∆t ∆t δPmax = (Pmax (1 − cos3 (θ)))2 (19)
Rearranging Eq. 9 for ∆t and substituting into Eq. 10 gives
where θ is the error in the yaw, and is estimated to be 5◦ .
the equation,
The total error in the power, Ptot is
1 2 2
ρAv 3
 
P = (11) ∂Ptot 2 ∂Pplot 2
2 δPtot = δPav + δPmax (20)
∂Pav ∂Pmax
As not all of the kinetic energy can be transferred from the
2 2
air to electricity, a power coefficient Cp must be introduced.
 
1 2 Pav 2
Giving the final equation, δPtot = δPav + δPmax (21)
Pmax Pmax2
1 Where Pplot is the power output of the data point one is
P = Cp ρAv 3 (12)
2 calculating the error for.

A PPENDIX B
O PTIMISING TSR D ERIVATION
When tip-speed ratio is optimised, there is maximum energy
extraction from the wind. This is because if the blades rotate
too slowly, wind can pass through the turbine undisturbed,
restricting the kinetic energy transferred to the blades. If the
blades rotate too quickly, not all of the air will pass through
the rotor, reducing the total amount of extracted kinetic energy.
When TSR is optimised, the time taken for the wind to
become undisturbed, ts , is equal to the time required for the
next blade to move into the position of the last blade, ts .
2π
ts = (13)
nω
s
tw = (14)
U0
where, n is the number of blades and s is the length of the
disturbed wind stream. When these times are approximately
equal, the resulting equation of Eq. 13 ≈ Eq. 14 can be
rearranged to give the optimal rotational frequency ωopt ,