Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jweia

Blockage corrections for wind tunnel tests conducted on a Darrieus

wind turbine
Houigab Jeong a, Seungho Lee b, Soon-Duck Kwon a, *
a
Department of Civil Engineering, Chonbuk National University, Chonju, Chonbuk, 561-763, South Korea
b
KOCED Wind Tunnel Center, Chonbuk National University, Chonju, Chonbuk, 561-763, South Korea

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this study, the influence of the blockage ratio in three wind tunnel tests conducted on a small vertical-
Blockage effect axis Darrieus wind turbine was quantitatively investigated. The vertical-axis Darrieus wind turbine was
Blockage correction installed in three wind tunnels with different test-section sizes corresponding to blockage ratios of 3.5,
Darrieus wind turbine 13.4, and 24.7%. The rotor torques, drag force, and upstream wind speeds were measured for the different
Vertical axis wind turbine blockage ratios. It is recommended from the tests that the reference wind speed of the wind turbine should
Wind tunnel test
be measured upstream at a distance of 3.5 times or more than the turbine diameter. The power coefficient
of the wind turbine was severely distorted based on the blockage ratio. The power coefficients at blockage
ratios of 13.4 and 24.7% were respectively 1.3 and 2 times higher than that at a blockage ratio of 3.5%.
The optimal tip speed ratio also significantly shifted to a higher range. Based on the method proposed by
Maskell (1963), a new correction coefficient is proposed for the Darrieus turbine from the measured drag
coefficients obtained at three different blockage ratios. The validity of the proposed correction coefficient
was confirmed by comparing it with the corrected power coefficients obtained using other correction
methods.

1. Introduction
To increase the economic efficiency of wind power generation, wind
turbines with a very large diameter are installed in mountainous or
coastal areas where wind resources are abundant. With each passing
year, the numbers of large wind-power generators and large-scale wind
farms are increasing. In recent years, a significant growth is observed in
small wind-turbine systems, which can supply independent power to
streetlights, telecommunication equipment, and disaster monitoring
equipment; moreover, they serve as distributed power sources (Pitteloud
and Gsanger, 2016). Recent research results reveal that a vertical-axis
wind farm might produce higher power densities compared to a
horizontal-axis wind farm by arranging counter-rotating vertical-axis
wind turbines (Dabiri, 2011).
When a new wind turbine is developed, the output performance must
be evaluated prior to releasing it on the market. In addition, the output
performances of the individual wind turbines must be known for micro
siting of a wind farm. The following is a method of evaluating the output
performance of a wind turbine. First, a wind turbine is installed in the
field, the output power of which is directly measured. Second, a wind
tunnel test is conducted to measure the output performance of the wind
turbine. Compared to the field test method, the wind tunnel test has an
advantage in that the output performance can be measured in a short
period of time and at a low cost. In addition, the wind tunnel tests can be
precisely controlled, allowing experiments to be conducted at various
desired wind velocities and low turbulence intensities to obtain consis-
tent and high-quality data. Thus, the wind tunnel tests are often used to
evaluate the output performance of a small vertical axis wind turbine
(VAWT).
However, the boundary walls in closed jet test section wind tunnels
generally prevent free expansion of the separated flow behind the wind
turbine, resulting in a distorted wind flow around the model, which is
different to that observed in an actual wind environment (Chen et al.,
2011). The flow and pressure around the model and along the wind
tunnel will be affected by solid and wake blockage effects. Thus, as the
output power of the wind turbine is proportional to the third power of the
wind speed, the wind acceleration due to the blockage effect significantly
affects the output performance of the wind turbine. Ideally, to avoid
these effects a small test model size would be selected but there cases
where this is not possible, like Reynolds scaling, better signal-noise in

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jeonghg@chonbuk.ac.kr (H. Jeong), sdkwon@chonbuk.ac.kr (S.-D. Kwon).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2018.06.002
Received 2 September 2017; Received in revised form 7 June 2018; Accepted 7 June 2018

0167-6105/© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

H. Jeong et al.
force and torque measurement, use of available model, ignorance of
acceptable scale for an unsteady blockage, etc. Hence, it is necessary to
correct the blockage effect to accurately evaluate the output power of a
wind turbine measured in a wind tunnel test.
Since the 1930s, wind tunnel tests have been conducted on a VAWT;
however, most authors lacked confidence in the experimental results
because the effect of the blockage was neglected (Blackwell et al., 1977).
Several studies have applied the blockage correction method to the re-
sults of the wind tunnel test. Blackwell et al. (1977) used the correction
formula proposed by Pope and Harper (1966) to correct the effects of the
blockage on the wind speed and pressure to analyze the output perfor-
mance of a Savonius wind turbine. In the study, although the uncertainty
in the Pope and Harper's correction factor was estimated to be 50%, the
method was applied because there was no other method to correct the
blockage effect for the Savonius wind turbine at the time. Alexander et al.
(1978) suggested a slight modification of Maskell's method (1963) to the
Savonius turbine. They measured the drag force of a Savonius turbine,
and then presented modified the correction factor. Ross and Altman
(2011) investigated wake characteristics and performance produced by
the same Savonius vertical-axis wind turbine at different physical scales
and in two different wind tunnels.
Bahaj et al. (2007) measured the output power and thrust based on
the rotor speed, flow velocity, and hub pitch angle for a marine current
turbine in a cavitation tunnel and a towing tank. The correction
methods for general propellers, such as the methods proposed by
Glauert (1947) and Pope and Harper (1966), are unsuitable for negative
thrust generators. Hence, Bahaj et al. (2007) modified the method
proposed by Glauert (1947) to correct the blockage effect on the marine
current turbine.
By conducting a wind tunnel test using a small horizontal-axis wind
turbine, Chen et al. (2011) confirmed that the blockage effect was more
affected by the tip speed ratio (TSR), blade pitch angle, and blockage
ratio, and less affected by the wind speed. In addition, the correction
coefficient obtained from the experiment was applied to the correction
formula proposed by Bahaj et al. (2007). The results show that the
correction is unnecessary when the pitch angle is 25
or more and when
the blockage ratio is less than 10%. Cho et al. (2012) placed three
different wind turbines in one wind tunnel, and corrected the power
coefficient using the method proposed by Bahaj et al. (2007). However,
they did not verify that the electrical and mechanical characteristics of
the three wind turbines used were the same. It is therefore unclear
whether their test results were affected by the blockage ratio or other
factors.
Cavagnaro and Polagye (2014) measured the torque of a tidal
generator based on the blockage ratio and flow velocity in water
channels of different sizes. They corrected the results obtained by the
methods proposed by Pope and Harper (1966), Bahaj et al. (2007), and
Werle (2010). The corrected results show that the output powers were
reduced in all the methods; the method proposed by Werle (2010)
resulted in the most reduction in the output power among them.
However, as Cavagnaro and Polagye explained, the methods applied
were ineffective in correcting the turbine output likely because the
correction methods don't account for the full physics in blockage effect
problems. Although various studies have been conducted to solve the
problem of the blockage effect in the wind tunnel test conducted on a
wind turbine, studies on correcting the blockage effect for a Darrieus
turbine are lacking.
The purpose of this study is to propose a method to effectively correct
the blockage effect observed in three wind tunnel tests conducted on a
small Darrieus turbine. Hence, a single vertical-axis Darrieus turbine was
installed on three wind tunnels with different test sectional sizes. The
torque and angular velocity were measured and then power, power co-
efficient and tip speed ratio were calculated. We applied the various
existing correction methods and the proposed correction method to the
measured output power to compensate for the blockage effect, and pre-
sented the results.
230
Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239
2. Blockage effects and correction methods
2.1. Blockage effects
Unlike a wind turbine exposed to free air without a boundary away
from the ground, the wind flows in a closed test section of a wind tunnel
are different because the four walls serve as boundaries. The distance
from the test specimen to the stream boundary of the test section of the
wind tunnel is usually shorter than that in an actual operating condition
in natural environments (Barlow et al., 1999), resulting in a blockage
effect.
The blockage effect can be divided into solid blockage and wake
blockage (Fig. 1). A solid blockage occurs because of the decrease in the
area for wind passing due to the test specimen inside the wind tunnel
(Fig. 1(a)); moreover, it depends on the blockage ratio defined by the
ratio of the projected specimen area to the cross-sectional area of the
wind tunnel. As shown in Fig. 2, the wind speed increases and the
pressure decreases to satisfy the Bernoulli equation, wherein the mass
flowing through the area reduced by the test specimen must be constant.
The wind speed temporarily increases near the test specimen, and after
passing through the specimen, the solid blockage effect decreases, and
the wind speed is restored to a free air flow condition. For the same
blockage ratio, the effect of the solid blockage is known to be greater in a
closed test section than in an open test section.
For a wind turbine, the near wake extends several diameters down-
stream; however, the size of the turbine wake is limited because of the
test section wall. This wake blockage is more complicated because the
size of the wake is itself a function of the drag or energy extracted from
the flow and the wake to tunnel area ratio. The magnitude of the
correction for the wake blockage increases with an increase in the wake
size, which corresponds to an increase in the drag (Barlow et al., 1999).
The wake blockage in an open test section is considered negligible
because the air flow is freely diffused. However, in a closed test section,
the wake blockage leads to an increase in the wind speed and should be
considered.
If the solid and wake blockages can be superimposed, the variations in
the wind speed occur along the wind tunnel, as shown in Fig. 2 (Hacket
and Wilsden, 1975). These blockage effects influence the results of the
wind tunnel tests, and thus, the blockage ratio is generally limited to 5%
to avoid these effects (Cockrell, 1980; Barlow et al., 1999; ASCE, 2012).
For the Savonius turbine, the blockage ratio should be kept to under
Fig. 1. Effect of a vertical-axis wind turbine on streamlines.
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

Uc ¼ U∞ ð1 þ εt Þ (5a)

1
εt ¼ BR (5b)
4

Here, Uc is the corrected wind speed (m/s) and εt is the correction factor
including the solid and wake blockages.

(2) Method proposed by Bahaj et al. (2007)

The correction method proposed by Bahaj et al. (2007) is based on an

actuator disk model. This method is used to correct the output power and
the TSR using the blockage factor, which is the ratio of the wind speed of
the empty test section to that with the wind turbine. The power coeffi-
cient can be corrected by multiplying the original power coefficient with
Fig. 2. Blockage effects in a wind tunnel test (Hacket and Wilsden, 1975). the cube of the blockage factor. The blockage factor, power coefficient,
and TSR are respectively expressed using Eqs. (6a) and (6b), and (6c).
approximately 3% (Ross and Altman, 2011).
Ut
BF ¼ (6a)
Uf
2.2. Blockage correction methods

The total blockage correction should be applied to the sum of the
velocity increments due to the wake and solid blockages. This section
reviews the blockage correction methods for a wind tunnel test on a
vertical axis wind turbine (VAWT) in a closed test section.
First, we define some variables commonly used for power calcu-
lation and correction of the wind turbines. The tip speed ratio (TSR) in
Eq. (1) is the ratio of the angular velocity of the blade tip to the wind
speed. The TSR is an important factor determining the magnitude of
the power generated by the rotor at any wind speed. The output power
of a wind turbine is sensitive to the TSR, and there is an optimum TSR
that results in the most efficient energy transfer and maximum power
coefficient.
ωr π nr
λ¼ ¼ (1)
U∞ 30U∞
Here, U∞ is the free stream wind speed (m/s), ω is the angular velocity
(rad/s), r is the radius of the rotor (m), and n is the speed of the rotor
(rpm). The blockage ratio is obtained as follows.
As
BR ¼
At
Here, As is the projected area of the rotor (m2), and At is the test section
area of the wind tunnel (m2). The drag coefficient is expressed as follows.
F
CD ¼ 1
2
ρAS U∞
2
Here, F is the drag force (N), and ρ is the density of air (kg/m3). The
power coefficient of a wind turbine is an index of the extent to which the
kinetic energy of the wind flow is converted into mechanical energy, and
is defined as follows.
CPf ¼ CPt  B3F (6b)
λf ¼ λt  BF (6c)
Here, Ut is the tunnel wind speed with the turbine (m/s), Uf is the tunnel
wind speed without the turbine (m/s), CPf is the power coefficient in the
freestream condition, CPt is the power coefficient in the wind tunnel
condition, λf is the TSR in the freestream condition, and λt is the TSR in
the wind tunnel condition.
(3) Method proposed by Maskell (1963)
Maskell (1963) measured the drag coefficients and base pressures of
four, square flat plates placed perpendicular to the freestream with
different blockage ratios. A semi-empirical term m was then used to
correct the blockage. The complete process to derive the blockage
correction is given in the study by Maskell (1963).
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
CDu BR  CPb  ðCDu BR  CPb Þ2  4CDu ð1  CPb Þ BR
m¼ (7)
2ð1  CPb Þ BR
(2)
Here, CDu is the uncorrected drag coefficient, and CPb is the base pressure
coefficient. In the study, m ¼ 3.15 for small values of blockage ratios less
than 4.5%. Incorporating the ratio of the drag coefficients, Cowdrey
(1968) proposed the ratio between the uncorrected and corrected wind
(3) speeds as follows.
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
U∞ 1
¼ (8)
Uc 1  mBR
(4) Method proposed by Alexander (1978)

Tω Alexander (1978) and Alexander and Holownia (1978) extended the

CP ¼ 1 (4)
2
ρAs U∞
3
method proposed by Maskell (1963) to a Savonius turbine. He simply
equated the terms in the dynamic pressure and measured the drag forces
Here, Τ is the torque (N⋅m). for both the square flat plates and Savonius rotors to obtain values of m.
     2  
(1) Method proposed by Pope and Harper (1966) CDu qc Uc 1
ϕ¼ ¼ ¼ ¼ (9)
CDf qu U∞
2 1  mSavonius BR
Pope and Harper (1966) proposed a method to correct the blockage
effect, which can be easily obtained by multiplying the input wind speed Here, CDf is the drag coefficient in the free flow condition without the
with the correction factor, as expressed in Eq. (5a). Their correction blockage effect (corrected drag coefficient), CDu is the drag coefficient in
factor εt for an arbitrary shape can be defined as the ratio of the cross the wind tunnel condition (uncorrected drag coefficient), qu is the un-
section of the wind tunnel to the projected area of the experimental corrected dynamic pressure, qc is the corrected dynamic pressure, and BR
model, as shown in Eq. (5b). is the blockage ratio of the swept area of the Savonius rotor to the test

231
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

section area of the wind tunnel. Because the wake is restricted due to the
tunnel walls at high blockage ratios, m decreases, reaching a value close
to 2.0, for a blockage ratio of 30%.

(5) Proposed method

Alexander (1978) successfully extended the method proposed by

Maskell (1963) to account for the wind tunnel test results of a Savonius
turbine. However, the experimental results obtained by Alexander
(1978) and Alexander and Holownia (1978) show that the correction
coefficient varies depending on the shape and characteristics of the
specimen. Therefore, the correction coefficients for the bluff bodies
(Maskell, 1963) and Savonius turbines (Alexander, 1978; Alexander and
Holownia, 1978) cannot be applied to the Darrieus turbines because they
are not properly calibrated.
Barlow et al. (1999) stated that a wind tunnel test is required to
determine the blockage corrections for some unusual shapes. Although
we employed the method proposed by Maskell (1963), a new correction
coefficient is proposed for a Darrieus turbine by measuring the drag co-
efficient from the wind tunnel tests. The semi-empirical correction co-
efficient is given as follows.
 
CDf 1
mDarrieus ¼ 1 (10)
CDu BR

Here, CDf is the drag coefficient in the free flow condition without the
blockage effects, which can be obtained by extrapolating the measured
drag forces, and CDu is the uncorrected measured drag coefficient with
the blockage effects.

3. Wind tunnel tests

3.1. Wind turbine and wind tunnels

As a preliminary test, a wind tunnel test was conducted on solid

rectangular plates. As shown in Fig. 3(a), the drag coefficients were
measured for the plates with different blockage ratios (5%–30%) under
different wind speeds. The purpose of the preliminary experiment was to
understand the influence of the aspect ratio on the drag coefficient and
then to quantitatively evaluate the effect of the aspect ratio on the
blockage correction. Another purpose of the test was to determine how
the wind speed changes in front of the specimen and to check the existing
blockage correction method.
In the main test, the wind turbine used in this study was a Darrieus
turbine with three straight blades. A commercial, small wind turbine
largely installed on a street light pole or a traffic sign pole was modified
and used in the experiment. The blade length was 0.38 m, and the
diameter of the rotor was 0.35 m. The type of blade was an NACA 4415
airfoil, the chord length and thickness of which were 75 and 12.5 mm,
respectively. The same wind turbine was used in the tests to ensure that
Fig. 3. Solid plate and Darrieus turbine installed in three different wind tunnels.
the conditions other than the blockage ratio did not affect the output
power of the wind turbine.
Three wind tunnels with different sizes were used to change the
Table 1
blockage ratio, ranging from 3.5 to 24.7%, when the Darrieus turbine Specifications of the wind tunnels.
was installed in the test sections. Fig. 3 shows the wind tunnel test sec-
Wind tunnel A B C
tions used in this study. Table 1 lists the detailed specifications of the
wind tunnels. The three wind tunnels were located in the KOCED Wind Blockage ratio 3.5% 13.4% 24.7%
Tunnel Center, Chonbuk National University, Korea. Flow Closed Open Closed
circulation
Test section 5 m  2.5 m  20 m 1 m  1.5 m  5 m 0.9 m  0.6 m  4 m
3.2. Test setup (W  H  L)
Wind velocity 0.5–31 m/s 0.3–20 m/s 0.5–10 m/s
Contraction 1:2.5 1:5 1:1
There are two ways of determining the output performance of a wind ratio
turbine, one of which involves measuring the electric power from the Turbulence <1.0% <0.8% <0.5%
generator and the other involves measuring the torque and angular ve- intensity
locity. In this study, the mechanical efficiency, which is converted to the Velocity < 1.0% < 0.5% < 1.0%
uniformity
torque of the rotating shaft, is measured to evaluate the aerodynamic

232
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

performance of the turbine. Table 2

Fig. 4 shows the torque measurement system and the substructure of Test cases for rectangular plates.
the turbine model. As shown in the figure, only the blade part was Test case Aspect ratio (H/W) Blockage ratio (%)
installed inside the wind tunnel and the vertical-axis shaft supporting the
P1 0.58, 1.0, 1.73 20, 25
blade was held using ball bearings. This shaft was finally connected to an P2 1.0 5, 10, 15, 20, 30
AC motor through the torque sensor, which is used to measure the me-
chanical torque generated by the wind. The TSR of the rotating blades
was controlled using the AC motor and associated inverter. The AC motor manufactured by Dacell, which could measure torques up to 0.98 N m.
used for controlling the speed was a Siemens 1LA7 series three-phase We used a 100M45A25 load cell manufactured by JR3, which was used
four-pole motor with a rated output and rated speed of 0.37 kW and to measure the three forces and the corresponding three moments, to
1670 rpm, respectively. The model of the inverter was LS008iG5A-4 calculate the correction factor considering the blockage effects. When the
manufactured by LS Industrial Systems, the maximum output fre- drag force was measured, the load cells were directly connected to the
quency of which was 400 Hz. ball bearings of the blade shaft without motor and torque sensor, and the
A hot wire anemometer TSI 8455 was used to measure the wind blade was allowed to freely rotate by the wind. The sampling rate was
speeds. A laser tachometer PLT200 manufactured by Monarch In- 1000 Hz for hotwire anemometer and torque sensor and 63 Hz for load
struments was used to measure the angular speed of the blades. The cell. Duration of measurement was 60 s at each case.
sensor used to measure the torque of the blade was TRD-10KC
4. Test results

4.1. Aspect ratio

The drag coefficients of the solid rectangular plates shown in Fig. 3(a)
were measured when the projection area was the same but the aspect
ratio was different. We conducted the test under the various test cases
listed in Table 2.
First, three plates with different aspect ratio under two different
blockage ratios were tested. Fig. 5 shows the effects of aspect ratio on
drag coefficients. The influence of the aspect ratio on drag coefficients
was negligible at blockage ratio of 20%, and maximum difference of drag
coefficients was less than 2% at blockage ratio of 25%. It was confirmed
from the test results that the effect of model aspect ratio on drag coeffi-
cient is not significant. As shown in Fig. 6, drag coefficients are consistent
regardless of wind speeds.
From this result, it can be easily assumed that the influence of the
wind tunnel aspect ratio on the drag coefficient is not great. In other
words, when the experiment is performed in the wind tunnels with
different aspect ratios and blockage ratios, the parameter that mainly
affects the drag coefficient is the blockage ratio, not the aspect ratio.

4.2. Reference wind speeds

When evaluating the output power of a wind turbine, a reliable

experimental result cannot be obtained unless the undisturbed reference
wind speed used in the output calculation is accurately measured. If the

Fig. 5. Drag coefficients of solid rectangular plates with three different aspect
Fig. 4. Measurement system and substructure of the turbine model. ratios (AR) and two blockage ratios (BR).

233
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

Fig. 6. Drag coefficients of square plates at various wind speeds.

Fig. 7. Measuring points of the wind speed (top view).

wind speed is measured too close to the turbine in the wind tunnel, the
air flow is stagnated because of the wind turbine, thereby under-
estimating the wind speed compared to the undisturbed case. If the wind
speed is measured too far away from the turbine, the wind speed changes
because of the wall boundary layer developed from the point of mea-
surement to the turbine.
As shown in Fig. 7, the wind speeds are measured in the three wind
tunnels by varying the anemometer points from 1D to 6D on the upstream
of the wind turbine along the centerline, where D is the diameter of the
rotor. To verify the effects of the parameters such as the blockage ratio,
inlet strength of the wind, and rotational speed of the rotor, we con-
ducted the test under the various experimental conditions, listed in
Table 3. In order to clarify the influence of one parameter, only one of the
three parameters in Table 3 was changed and the others were fixed. For
example, when changing the blockage ratio three times, the inlet wind
speed and the rotor speed were fixed to the one value in Table 3. The
variation in the rotor speed from 100 to 700 rpm corresponds to TSRs
ranging from 0.39 to 2.73.
Fig. 8(a)–8(c) show the effects of the blockage ratio, inlet wind speed,
and rotational speed of the turbine on the upstream wind speed ratio,
respectively. The horizontal axis in the figures represents the ratio of the
streamwise distance to the diameter of the turbine. The upstream wind

Table 3
Test conditions for measuring the reference wind speed.
Test case Blockage ratio (BR) Inlet wind speed (U∞) Rotor speed (RS)

% m/s rpm

V1 3.5, 13.4, 24.7 4.3 300 Fig. 8. Variations in upstream wind speed ratio based on blockage ratio, inlet
V2 13.4 4.3, 6.4, 8.6 300 wind speed, and rotational speed of the rotor.
V3 13.4 4.3 100, 300, 500, 700

234
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

speed ratio of the vertical-axis turbine is obtained by dividing the wind

speed at a specific point by the average wind speed ranging from 4.5D to
5.5D.
The test results show that the upstream wind speed decreases as the
wind speed measurement point approaches the turbine, regardless of the
parameters. In particular, at a close range below 3D, the decrease in the
upstream wind velocity ratio was more significant with the decreases in
the blockage ratio and wind speed. As the speed of the wind turbine
increases, the upstream wind speed ratio decreases. This is because the
higher the TSR, which is proportional to the rotor speed, the less the air
flows through the rotor and the higher is the solidity ratio of the turbine.
The otherwise consistent wind speed at the wind tunnel decreases
dramatically close to the turbine. However, if the distance from the
turbine is above 3.5D, the change in the wind speed is within 0.5% in
all the cases. Therefore, it is recommended that the reference wind speed
for calculating the power coefficient of the wind turbine should be
measured upstream at a distance of 3.5 times or more than the turbine
diameter to avoid the distortion in the output power.

4.3. Blockage factors

The blockage factor in Eq. (6a), which is the ratio of the wind speed of
the empty test section to that with the wind turbine, is a good indicator to
reflect the variation in the wind speed due to the blockage effects. In the
tests, the blockage factors were calculated from the measured wind
speeds for the three wind tunnels. The blockage ratios ranged from 3.5 to
24.7%, the reference wind speed changed from 4 to 7 m/s, and the TSR
varied from 0.2 to 2.5.
Fig. 9(a) shows the blockage factors for each blockage ratio. The
experimental results show that the change in the blockage factor with the
increase in the wind speed is almost constant with a maximum difference
of 0.8%, 0.6%, 1.8% for blockage ratio of 3.5%, 13.4%, 24.7% respec-
tively. However, the blockage factor is clearly different based on the
blockage ratio. In particular, the blockage factor is reduced to 0.9 for a
blockage ratio of 24.7%. Fig. 9(b) shows the blockage factor based on the
change in the TSR due to the blockage ratio. As shown in the figure, as the
TSR increases, the blockage factor gradually decreases. However, for a
TSR of 1.7 and above, it converges to a constant value, indicating no
further decrease in the wind speed. In addition, the change in the
blockage factor based on the TSR was larger at higher blockage ratios
than at lower blockage ratios. Fig. 9. Effect of wind speed and tip speed ratio on blockage factor at three
blockage ratios (3.5, 13.4, and 24.7%).
4.4. Power coefficients
correction of the blockage effect is indispensable to accurately evaluate
The power coefficient of the wind turbine, expressed in Eq. (4), was the power coefficient during the wind tunnel test.
computed using the measured torque and reference wind speed. To
quantitatively determine the effects of the parameters on the power co- 4.5. Correction coefficients
efficient, the power coefficient was obtained based on the blockage ratio,
TSR, and wind speed. The blockage ratio ranged from 3.5 to 24.7%, the The drag force acting on the rotor of the Darrieus turbine was
reference wind speed changed from 4 to 7 m/s, and the TSR varied from measured for blockage ratios of 3.5, 13.4, and 24.7%. In the experiment,
0.2 to 2.5. three wind speeds of 3.8, 4.7, and 5.5 m/s were used. The rotational
Fig. 10(a)–10(c) show the power coefficient for four different wind speed of the wind turbine was not controlled during the drag measure-
speeds at blockage ratio of 3.5, 13.4 and 27.4%. The maximum power ment, and the drag was measured in the state of free rotation due to the
coefficient under the same blockage ratio condition was found to increase wind (Alexander, 1978).
with increasing wind speed. And the wind speed increases by 1 m/s the Fig. 12 shows the measured drag coefficients of the square plate and
maximum power coefficient by about 10%. Also optimal TSR shifted by the Darrieus turbine based on the blockage ratios. As shown in the figure,
about 7% in every 1 m/s wind speed increment. as the blockage ratios increase, the drag coefficient also increases. In the
Fig. 11 shows the power coefficient based on the blockage ratio at case of the Darrieus turbine, the drag coefficient increases by approxi-
wind speed of 7 m/s. In this case, the larger the blockage ratio, the mately 1.5 times as the blockage ratios increase from 3.5% to 24.7%. In
greater is the maximum power coefficient and the corresponding opti- addition, the drag coefficient and its slope based on the blockage ratios
mum TSR. The power coefficient for a blockage ratio of 13.4% is are significantly different in the square plate and the Darrieus turbine.
approximately 1.3 times higher than that for a blockage ratio of 3.5%, Thus, the plate-based original correction method proposed by Maskell
and that for a blockage ratio of 24.7% was overestimated by approxi- (1963) cannot be used to the Darrieus turbine.
mately 2 times. The optimal TSR also significantly shifted to a higher A new correction coefficient for the Darrieus turbine was derived
value. This implies that the power coefficient of the wind turbine and the based on the aforementioned method. The regression curve for the drag
optimal TSR are very sensitive to the blockage effect. Therefore, the coefficient as a function of the blockage ratios is obtained, as shown in

235
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

Fig. 11. Uncorrected power coefficients of a Darrieus turbine as a function of

the blockage ratio (3.5, 13.4, and 24.7%), TSR at wind speed of 7 m/s.

Fig. 12. Drag coefficients for square plate and Darrieus turbine.

Fig. 13. Correction coefficients (m) for square plate (Maskell, 1963), Savonius
Fig. 10. Relationships between power coefficient and TSR for four different turbine (Alexander, 1978), and Darrieus turbine (present study).
wind speeds.

236
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

Fig. 13. The correction coefficient m is then derived by substituting this

into Eq. (11). Fig. 13 shows the correction coefficients for the square
plate obtained using the method proposed by Maskell (1963), Savonius
turbine using the method proposed by Alexander (1978), and Darrieus
turbine proposed in this study.
As shown in Fig. 13, the slopes of the correction coefficients for the
square plate, Savonius turbine, and Darrieus turbine are largely similar.
However, the relative magnitudes of the correction coefficients were
different because of the difference in the solidities of the three specimens
in the wind tunnel. Therefore, a generalized equation can be used to
approximate the correction coefficient across all three types by changing
the intercept in Eq. (11). The following correction coefficient as a func-
tion of the blockage ratio was obtained.

m ¼ 6:92B2R  6:76BR þ c (11)

where c is 3.5 for square plate, 3.2 for Savonius turbine and 2.8 for
Darrieus turbine. The coefficient of determination, R2, of Eq. (11) was
0.996, 0.999, 0.997 for square plate, Savonius turbine, Darrieus turbine,
respectively.

4.6. Blockage corrections

In the previous sections, we found that the blockage ratio significantly

affected the power coefficient of the wind turbine. Thus, we suggested a
correction coefficient for the Darrieus turbine. In this section, the power
coefficients, given in Eq. (4), are compared by applying the various
correction methods. The correction methods used were the ones pro-
posed by Maskell (1963), Pope and Harper (1966), Alexander (1978),
Bahaj et al. (2007), and this study. The correction in this study is done in
two steps. First, the blockage ratio is substituted into Eq. (11) to obtain m.
Then, the m is substituted into Eq. (8) to get the corrected wind speed.
Fig. 14 shows the results of the corrected power coefficients. In the
figure, the target power coefficient for comparison is slightly reduced
from the measured value for a blockage ratio of 3.5% by applying the
present method. The correction methods decrease the power coefficient
because of the blockage effect. However, the methods proposed by Pope
and Bahaj et al. (2007) lead to slightly reduced power coefficients, which
are still much greater than the target value. In the correction method
Fig. 14. Power coefficients obtained using various correction methods ( :
proposed by Pope and Harper (1966), only the area ratio of the model to
uncorrected, : Pope and Harper (1966), : Bahaj et al. (2007), :
the wind tunnel test section is considered, making it unsuitable for cor-
Maskell (1963), : Alexander (1978), : present, : target).
recting the blockage effect of the wind turbine with other influencing
parameters such as the TSR. The method proposed by Bahaj et al. (2007)
showed a slight improvement in the maximum power coefficient and
optimal TSR correction compared to the method proposed by Pope and
Harper, but is still unsuitable for a Darrieus turbine.
As shown in Fig. 15, the methods proposed by Maskell (1963) and
Alexander (1978) are overcorrected and the power coefficients are
smaller than the target value. These results are well predicted from the
drag measurements in the previous section. The drag coefficients of the
square plate and the Savonius turbine comprising drag type buckets are
higher than that of the Darrieus turbine. Therefore, the correction errors
are inevitable for objects other than a Darrieus turbine. The method
proposed by Alexander (1978) shows better performance; however, the
results are overestimated for a Darrieus turbine.
As shown in Figs. 14 and 15, the present method shows the best
correction result. The present method corrects not only the maximum
power coefficient but also the optimal TSR. The present method results in Fig. 15. Relative correction errors of the maximum power coefficient for three
less than 10% error in the power coefficient after correction in all the TSR blockage ratios.
ranges. Fig. 15 shows the relative correction errors of the maximum
power coefficient.
angular velocity, air density, rotor height, rotor diameter, and wind
4.7. Measurement uncertainties speed. In the wind tunnel test, the measurement uncertainty of the power
coefficient is expressed by the partial differential equation shown in Eq.
The power coefficient using Eq. (4) can be determined from a function (12b). The measurement uncertainty of the power coefficient is derived
of six variables given in Eq. (12a), which includes the torques, rotor using Eq. (12c) (Jang et al., 2015).

237
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

Table 4 significantly shifted to a higher range. This implies that careful

Uncertainty in the measurements. attention should be paid while conducting the wind tunnel tests
Torque Air Rotational Wind Length Total and their corrections for high blockage ratios.
density speed speed (mm) uncertainty (5) Based on the method proposed by Maskell (1963), a new correc-
1% 0.3% 0.01% 0.5% 0.5 1.85% tion coefficient for the Darrieus turbine is proposed from the
measured drag coefficients for three different blockage ratios. The
validity of the proposed correction coefficient in this study was
CP ¼ f ðT; ω; ρ; H; D; VÞ (12a) verified by comparing it with the corrected power coefficients

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 2  2  2  2  2  2
∂f ∂f ∂f ∂f ∂f ∂f
ΔCP ¼  ΔT þ  Δω þ  Δρ þ  ΔH þ  ΔD þ  ΔU (12b)
∂T ∂ω ∂ρ ∂H ∂D ∂U

obtained using other correction methods. The methods based on

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ΔCP ω 2 T 2  2  2  2 
Δρ
¼  ΔT þ  Δω þ
CP P P ρ H
Here, T is the torque, ω is the angular velocity, D is the diameter of the
rotor, and H is the height of the rotor.
The measurement errors of the torque sensor, tachometer, and
anemometer were 1%, 0.01%, and 0.5%, respectively. Table 4 lists
the error bound of the sensors. The combined uncertainty in the power
measurement based on Eq. (12c) is found to be 1.85%.
5. Conclusion
This study quantitatively evaluates the blockage effect that occurs
during the wind tunnel test of a small Darrieus turbine. A single vertical-
axis Darrieus turbine was installed in three wind tunnels with different
test sectional sizes corresponding to blockage ratios of 3.5, 13.4, and
24.7%. The following are the conclusions obtained through a series of
wind tunnel tests and correction procedures:
the wind speeds, such as those proposed by Pope and Harper
ΔH ΔD ΔU
2 (1966) and Bahaj et al. (2017), underestimated the power coef-
þ þ þ 3 ficient, whereas the drag-based methods, such as those proposed
D U
by Maskell (1963) and Alexander (1978), overestimated the same.
(12c) The present method corrects not only the maximum power coef-
ficient but also the optimal TSR for the Darrieus turbine compared
to other correction methods. Note that the present correction co-
efficient is applicable to the blockage ratio up to 30%.
Acknowledgement
This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program
through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the
Ministry of Education (No. 2017R1D1A3B03030206), and the grant
(18CTAPB13292302000000) from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure
and Transport of Korean government through the Korea Agency for
Infrastructure Technology Advancement and the KOCED Project Man-
agement Center.
References

Alexander, A.J., 1978. Wind tunnel corrections for Savonius rotors. In: 2nd International
(1) The wind speed in the wind tunnels decreased dramatically close Symposium on Wind Energy Systems, Paper E6, 69–80.
to the wind turbine. However, the variation in the wind speed was Alexander, A.J., Holownia, B.P., 1978. Wind tunnel tests on a Savonius rotor. J. Wind
within 0.5%, regardless of the parameters when the distance Eng. Ind. Aerod. 3 (4), 343–351.
ASCE Standard, 2012. Wind Tunnel Testing for Buildings and Other Structures. American
from the turbine was above 3.5 times or more than the diameter of
Society of Civil Engineers. ASCE/SEI 49–12.
the rotor. Therefore, it is recommended that the reference wind Bahaj, A.S., Molland, A.F., Chaplin, J.R., Batten, W.M.J., 2007. Power and thrust
speed for calculating the power coefficient of the wind turbine measurements of marine current turbines under various hydrodynamic flow
should be measured upstream at a distance of 3.5 times or more conditions in a cavitation tunnel and a towing tank. Renew. Energy 32 (3), 407–426.
Barlow, J.B., Rae, W.H., Pope, A., 1999. Low-speed Wind Tunnel Testing. John Wiley &
than the turbine diameter to avoid any distortion in the output Sons, Canada.
power. Blackwell, B.F., Sheldahl, R.F., Feltz, L.V., 1977. Wind Tunnel Performance Data for Two-
(2) From the wind tunnel test of the rectangular plates, it was found and Three-bucket Savonius Rotors. Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM.
Cavagnaro, R., Polagye, B., 2014. An evaluation of blockage corrections for a helical
that the influence of the plate aspect ratio on drag coefficient was cross-flow turbine. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Oxford Tidal Energy Workshop. Oxford,
negligible up to blockage ratio of 25%. Therefore, the aspect ratio UK.
of the wind tunnel test section may not influence on the drag Chen, T.Y., Liou, L.R., 2011. Blockage corrections in wind tunnel tests of small horizontal-
axis wind turbines. Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 35 (3), 565–569.
coefficient of specimen, and the parameter that mainly affects the Cho, K.P., Jeong, S.H., Chang, I.T., 2012. A study on blockage effects of vertical axis wind
drag coefficient is the blockage ratio, not the aspect ratio. turbines. The Wind Engineering Institute of Korea 16 (3), 117–123 (in Korean).
(3) The blockage factor, which is the ratio of the wind speed of the Cockrell, D.J., 1980. Blockage Corrections for bluff Bodies in Confined Flows. ESDU
80024.
empty test section to that with the wind turbine, was not influ- Cowdrey, C.F., 1968. Application of Maskell's theory of wind-tunnel blockage to some
enced by the inlet wind speeds but was affected by the blockage large-solid models. In: Proceedings of a Symposium on Buildings and Structures.
ratio and the TSR. The change in the blockage factor based on the Loughborough University of Technology, UK.
Dabiri, J.O., 2011. Potential order-of-magnitude enhancement of wind farm power
TSR was greater for higher blockage ratios than for lower blockage
density via counter-rotating vertical-axis wind turbine arrays. J. Renew. Sustain.
ratios. Energy 3, 043104.
(4) The power coefficient of the wind turbine was severely distorted Glauert, H., 1947. The Elements of Aerofoil and Airscrew Theory, second ed. Cambridge
based on the blockage ratio. The power coefficients for blockage University Press, New York.
Hacket, J.E., Wilsden, D.J., 1975. Determination of Low Speed Wake Blockage
ratios of 13.4 and 24.7% were respectively 1.3 and 2 times higher Corrections via Tunnel wall Pressure Measurements, AGARD Fluid Dynamic Panel
than that for a blockage ratio of 3.5%. The optimal TSR also Symposium on Wind Tunnel Design and Testing Techniques, London, UK.

238
H. Jeong et al. Journal of Wind Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics 179 (2018) 229–239

Jang, C.M., Kim, Y.G., Kang, S.K., Lee, J.H., 2015. An experiment for the effects of the
distance and rotational direction of two neighboring vertical Savonius blades. Int. J.
Energy Res. 40, 632–638.
Maskell, E.C., 1963. A Theory of the Blockage Effects on bluff Bodies and Stalled Wings in
a Closed Wind Tunnel. Aeronautical Research Council, Reports and Memoranda, No.
3400.
Pitteloud, J.D., Gs€
anger, S., 2016. Small Wind World Report 2016. Summary, World Wind
Energy Association.
Pope, A., Harper, J.J., 1966. Low Speed Wind Tunnel Testing. John Wiley & Sons, New
York.
Ross, I., Altman, A., 2011. Wind tunnel blockage corrections: review and application to
Savonius vertical-axis wind turbines. J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerod. 99 (5), 523–538.
Werle, M.J., 2010. Wind turbine wall-blockage performance corrections. J. Propul. Power
26 (6), 1317–1321.

239