See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/262003177

Investigation of Self Yaw and its Potential Using a Hydraulic Soft Yaw System
for 5 MW Wind Turbine

Article  in  Wind Engineering · April 2013

DOI: 10.1260/0309-524X.37.2.165

CITATIONS READS

5 78

2 authors:

Søren Stubkier Henrik C. Pedersen

Ymer Aalborg University
14 PUBLICATIONS   49 CITATIONS    157 PUBLICATIONS   939 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Design of reliable fluid power systems View project

Development and Optimization of Mechanical Topology for Fast Switching Valve for Digital Displacement Units View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Henrik C. Pedersen on 30 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Investigation of Self Yaw and its Potential
using a Hydraulic Soft Yaw System for 5 MW Wind
Turbine
Søren Stubkier1 and Henrik C. Pedersen2
1Ph.D. candidate
at Hydratech-Industries, 8600 Silkeborg, Denmark, sst@hydratech-industries.com
2Associate
Professor, Department of Energy Technology, Aalborg University, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark,
hcp@et.aau.dk

ABSTRACT
The focus of the current paper is on a hydraulic soft yaw system, designed to reduce the
loading of the turbine structure, by absorbing wind guest via the hydraulic system, but
which also enables the system to be used as a self-aligning yaw system. The system is
analyzed with basis in the NREL 5-MW turbine, modeled in FAST, in which a new robust
method for implementing Coulomb friction is utilized. Based on this model and a model of
the hydraulic system, the influence of friction and wind speed is investigated in relation to
the possibility to use the system as a self-aligning yaw system. Similarly the behavior of the
hydraulic system is analyzed and it is concluded that the hydraulic yaw system allows self-
yaw under normal operating conditions for the turbine. Self-yaw control is possible in wind
speeds above 12 m/s when yaw friction is kept below 1 MNm.

Keywords: Yaw system, Friction, Load reduction, Soft yaw, Passive yaw, Self-aligning

1. INTRODUCTION
Considering the yaw system for wind turbines there has not been any significant development
within this area for the last 20 years, where a standard system is made as an electrical yaw
system, consisting of a number of electrical motors mounted with gear reduction units
connected with a pinion-tooth-rim assembly. This normally leads to a very high gear ratio;
typically well over 1:15.000. Further a friction bearing or roller bearing in combination with a
yaw brake system is utilized making the yaw system very stiff. With the increased demands
for size and lifetime of the wind turbine structure, new measures, however, needs to be taken
to fulfill the normal design life time requirement of up to 25 years with an up-time of 95%. In
order to meet these demands it is necessary to look into the system design of the yaw system.
Studies have shown that a significant load reduction may be achieved by making the yaw
system soft [1, 2, 3], why this may be a part of the solution. In this relation hydraulic fluid power
systems seems the ideal solution for a soft yaw system, as it is necessary to have the system
moving to absorb the loads - resembling the shock absorption system effect on a car.
 Besides the load reductions that a hydraulic soft yaw system may bring, the system has
several other positive effects which relates to the load reduction and the operation of the system.
One of these side effects is the possibility to use the system as a passive- or self yaw system, which
is the focus of the current paper, where one strategy is to let the fluctuating wind loads aid in the
yawing of the nacelle. Similarly the systems also benefits from overload handling. One of the
problems in the normal yaw system design is the fact that the normal system changes
configuration when changing from a fixed yaw system with the yaw brakes locked to active
yawing. Considering a traditional yaw system, then this operates by releasing the hydraulic yaw
brakes and then activating the electrical motors when the nacelle needs to be turned. However,
this enables one of the possible root causes for yaw systems break down, where the yaw motors
are operating in generator mode, in which case the load on the system braking pinion and tooth
rim teeth is raised and/or the motors are accelerated to the point of break down. Ultimately
these problems may be traced back to the friction bearing not being a well defined design
foundation for dimensioning the yaw system, as the friction changes with temperature, wear, dirt
and loading of the bearing. In a hydraulic soft yaw system this problem is however overcome
quite simply by using pressure relief valves, which are installed for safety measures anyhow.
Limited material has been published on hydraulic yaw systems, and for the material
published, most have focused on load reduction possibilities, by using the system as a soft yaw
concept. An overview of the most significant hydraulic yaw system designs may be found in
Stubkier et al. [4]. Further two wind turbine manufactures claim to be using hydraulic yaw
systems. The company Mervento has erected a turbine using hydraulic cylinders as yaw
system [5]. The cylinders operates after a push-pull principle in order to turn the nacelle
around. When a cylinder hits the end stop it is possible to release the cylinder letting it move
back into a more beneficial position.
Another company called Condor Wind has designed a two bladed upwind turbine utilizing
a hydraulic yaw system [6]. The turbine Condor5 utilizes hydraulic motors to yaw the turbine
in a soft and damped manner, as the yaw system is used to regulate the power input to the
turbine instead of the normal pitch system. The yaw system is designed to yaw up to 10 deg/s
and at loads of up to 2000 [kNm].
Also General Electric Energy is looking into hydraulic yaw systems for their turbines, since
two patent applications have been published within the last year [7, 8]. The first patent
concerns the possibility of energy harvest from the rotor shaft in off-grid operation combined
with the possibility to self-yaw the system by mechanically controlling the oil flow in the yaw
system by the wind vane. The second patent application focuses on over load protection of the
gear pinions by utilization of hydraulic over pressure valves in different combinations.
Based on the above ideas a new concept have been developed, which overcome the
previously mentioned problems, and which shows very promising results with regard to both
load reductions in the turbine structure and which enables passive yawing or self yawing during
off-grid operation, using only the loading from the wind to turn the nacelle. Self yawing and
passive yawing here refers to the case where the yaw angle is fixed and the case where the
system is yawing passively, i.e. without applying additional power to the system. The focus of the
current paper is on this new concept, the self yaw possibility and how this is affected by friction in
the yaw bearing. The analysis of the system is made using the aerolastic code FAST, which have
been modified to include Coulomb friction in the yaw bearing. A description of the new concept
is first presented, along with a model of the hydraulic system. This is followed by a short
description of how the friction is implemented and results showing the effect of the friction in the
system. Based on the presented models the system’s ability to self yaw is investigated for different
wind speeds and yaw friction values. Finally the behavior of the hydraulic system is analyzed
with focus on the operating conditions for the hydraulic motors and the system is found also to be
applicable during erection of the turbine and under grid loss under certain conditions.

2. CONCEPT DESCRIPTION
The hydraulic diagram for the yaw system in consideration is shown in figure 1. The concept
design is based on the loads found in the IEC 64100 Design Load Cases (DLC’s), with basis in the
NREL 5 MW reference turbine. The system is designed for a maximum load estimate of 18
[MNm], cf. [1], using six hydraulic motors with reduction gears and a gear reduction of 1:2500.
The diagram shown in figure 1 comprise the full hydraulic yaw system, where the
supply system and direction valve for active yaw (pos. 5 and 6) are used when yawing
actively, why this is not considered further in this paper. Similarly the flushing valve,
flushing check valves, flushing pressure relief valve and boost pump pressure relief valve
(pos. 7, 9, 10 and 11 respectively) are only used for flushing and cooling, why either not
considered further. The system may therefore be considered as shown in figure 2.

1. Nacelle inertia
2. Hyd. motor/pumps
3. Accumulators
2 2 2

4
4. Control valves
3 5. Supply system
6
6. Dir. valve for active yaw
7
5 8
9
CU
7. Flushing valve
Nacelle inertia

12 13 8. Pressure relief valve (PRV)

1
9. Flushing check valves
3
10. Flushing PRV
4
10
11
2 2 2 11. Boost pump PRV
12. Control valve for self-yaw
13. Control unit for self-yaw

Figure 1: Concept diagram of hydraulic self-yawing system.

CU Nacelle inertia

Figure 2: Simplified schematics of the soft yaw concept including self-yaw.

Considering the nacelle inertia (pos. 1) this is coupled to the reduction gears via a tooth rim
and pinion yielding a total gear ratio of 1:4407. For the system to work for both active
yawing and as a soft yaw system, the hydraulic motors should be able operate as a both
motor and pump, why an internal 250 [ccm/rev] gear-motor/pump with four quadrant
operation options is chosen. Each of these pump/motors are able to deliver/withstand a
torque of 1200 [Nm] at 400 [bar]. The hydraulic accumulators (pos. 3) are of the
spring/piston type, with an equivalent stiffness of 4 [Bar/liter]. The size of the accumulator
is scalable, but in practice it will be an advantage to use several smaller accumulators than
a few big ones as this will minimize piston stroke and hence the wear on the accumulator
pistons. Each of the accumulators in figure 1 represents two 25 liters accumulators. The
accumulators may be disconnected from the system using the control valves (pos. 4),
which are used in controlling the damping and spring effect in the soft yaw system. This is
done in combination with the hydraulic control valve (pos. 12), which is also used for self
yawing. The valve is taken to be critically damped and have an eigenfrequency of ωn = 7
[Hz], with a nominal flow rate of 800 [l/min] at 10 [Bar] nominal pressure drop. Finally the
pressure relief valve (pos. 8) is set to 200 [Bar].
Considering the possibility to use the system for passive yawing, it may be seen from figure 1
that the ports of the hydraulic motors (pos. 2) may be short circuited (via valve pos. 12).
Hereby the motors may rotate freely or be controlled by the pressure drop over the control
valve. By short circuiting the motors actively at the right time, it is possible to decide which
direction the system should yaw, where the timing may be based on the pressures in the
system. This is similar to what Hildingsson, [9], suggested in his patent. However, in the present
concept this is combined with soft yaw idea, as presented in the patent by Doman [10]. Both
patents are described and discussed in Stubkier et al. [4].

2.1. Hydraulic system model

The soft yaw concept is realized using hydraulics and to evaluate the system, the dynamics of
the hydraulic systems needs to be taken into account. As neither the active yaw system or the
flushing and cooling system affects the overall dynamics when considering passive yawing,
this may be neglected without loss of generality. Hence it is possible to reduce the concept
drawing of figure 1 to the simple schematics of figure 2. The general equations describing the
hydraulic system behavior are presented in the following. It should be noted that the model is
based on ideal components without losses, as these have none or very limited effect on the
dynamics in the system.
Starting with the hydraulic motors, these are fixed displacement units, hence the model is
simply a static model of the motors, where the total torque required to drive the motors may
be described as:

Myaw, sys = km≠∆p≠D (1)

where km = nhyd,motor ≠ rgear, is the number of hydraulic motors multiplied with the total gear
ratio of the yaw system. D is the displacement of the motors and ∆p is the pressure change
across the motor. Similarly the flow through each motor is described as:

Q = D ⋅θ
(2)

≠
where θ is the motor shaft speed.
 Considering next the accumulators, these are of the piston-spring type, why the dynamics
of these are described by the pressure build up in the accumulator volume and the movement
of the accumulator piston. The pressure build up in the accumulator is described as:

β
p
= eff ⋅ (Qin − A ⋅ x
) (3)
V (x )

where βeff is the bulk modulus of the oil entrapped in the accumulator, which is modeled as
pressure and air content dependent. V (x) is the volume of the oil chamber in the accumulator,
.
Qin is the net flow into the accumulator, A is the area of the accumulator piston and x is the
accumulator piston velocity. The piston movement is here simply described by Newtons
second law of motion as:

x

⋅m = A ⋅ p − x
⋅ B − x ⋅kspr (4)

where B is the viscous damping coefficient, which has been experimentally determined, and
kspr is the spring coefficient of the accumulators. For this prove of concept model the
accumulators are modeled as spring loaded accumulators. In reality, these would most likely be
gas filled instead. Modeling the accumulators as gas-accumulators, would however significantly
add to the complexity of the model, without adding further to the dominating dynamics in the
system. For this reason the accumulators are simply modeled as spring loaded accumulators.
Continuing with the 2/2-proportional valves these are used to control the flow to/from the
accumulators and the flow between the two sides of the motors. The flow across each of the
valves may be described by the orifice equation as:

2
Q = A(x v ) ⋅C d ⋅ ∆p ⋅ sign ( ∆p ) (5)
ρoil

Which is valid for orifices with sharp edges with turbulent flow. A (xv) is here the opening area
of the orifice, which is explicitly related to the control signal as described below. ρoil is the oil
density, ∆p is the pressure change across the valve and Cd is the discharge coefficient of the
valve normally set to a value close to 0.6. To account for the dynamics of the valves, the spool
movement is simply described as a second order system with a natural eigenfrequency of
7 [Hz] and a damping ratio of 1 as described above:

x
v   0 1 x v   0 
 = 2   +  ⋅u (6)
x

v  −wn −2ζωn x
v  c 1 

Where xv is the normalized valve spool movement, u is the input signal to the valve and c1 the
coefficient between normalized spool movement and input signal. A linear relationship
between valve opening area A(xv) and spool movement is furthermore assumed.
Finally the pressure build up in the hydraulic pipes and hoses are described by the
continuity equation as:

βeff (q in − q out )
p= (7)
Vhose

Where βeff is the effective bulk modulus of the oil in the present hose.
 Finally the last elements in the system is the pressure relief valve, which opens if the
pressure in either of the two lines exceed the set value. The pressure relief valve is here
modeled as infinitely fast, with the flow through the valve given by:

∆p ⋅ K qp ∆p > Pcrack


Q = 0 −Pcrack < ∆p < Pcrack (8)

∆p ⋅ K qp ∆p < −Pcrack

where ∆p is the pressure is the pressure difference across the valve and Kqp is the flow-
pressure coefficient for the given pressure relief valve which gives the flow through the valve
relative to the pressure drop across the valve. Pcrack is the opening pressure of the valve. The
flow through the valve is defined positive in one direction (similar to positive definition of
pressure difference), but may run in both directions, indicated by a possible negative sign.
This completes the model of the hydraulic system, which captures the main dynamics of
the system, and the model is included with the aerodynamic code which is modified to take
into account friction in the yaw bearing as described next.

3. FRICTION MODELING IN FAST

The Coulomb friction in the system plays an important role when the dynamics are
considered. The Coulomb friction is, however, very difficult to implement in a dynamic model
due to its nonlinearity around zero velocity. The Coulomb friction is considered constant for
all velocities except zero. At zero velocity, the friction maintains any value, not exceeding the
constant value, hereby preventing motion.
To overcome the problem regarding implementation of Coulomb friction in a model,
standard approaches have been taken. This includes using a classical hyperbolic tangent
function or the modeling of a stiff spring holding the yaw system in place until the yaw
moment exceeds the friction threshold. Both methods have been tested in the aerodynamic
code HAWC2, but both approaches found to be useless.
An alternative approach have therefore been developed based on the FAST code1, where
the solver program’s source code is changed to take friction in the yaw system into account.
The solver code is based on the Adams-Bashforth-Moulton predictor-corrector method, and it
is important to take the numerical solver into account, both when determining the
accelerations needed to stop the yaw system and when to figure out how to update the values
of accelerations in the system. Mathematically the friction is implemented as described in the
following partition of the FAST equations of motion.

Caa Cab q a  fa 

   =   (9)
Cba Cbb q b  fb 

Considering equation 9, C is the mass terms of the wind turbine model, qa are the unknown
accelerations, qb are the known accelerations, fa are the known forces and fb are the unknown
forces. The known accelerations qb are the accelerations of the system needed to bring it to a
hold in the given solver iteration. In this case it would be the yaw acceleration needed to bring
the nacelle to a stop. fb are the forces and moments needed to get the accelerations qb, in this
case including the yaw torque needed to bring it to a stop. fa are the forces and moments
already applied to the system by for example aerodynamic loading and qa are the
accelerations in the remaining system DOFs when the yaw system is brought to a hold by fb.

1 Open-source code developed at NWTC a part of NREL [11]

 Rearranging the equations for the known and unknown accelerations leads to the
following equations, where qa are the unknown accelerations:

Caa ⋅ q a = fa − Cab ⋅ q b (10)

fb = Cba ⋅ q a + Cbb ⋅ q b (11)

Combining the equations yield

 Caa 0 q a  fa − Cab ⋅ q b 

  =  (12)
−Cba I   fb   Cbb ⋅ q b 

Based on the above equations, the unknown accelerations qa of the system may be
determined and hence added to the system dynamics if the yaw system stops. In this way the
unknown forces may be described.
Knowing the forces, or in this case the torque fb,yaw, needed to bring the yaw system to a
hold, the value is compared to the constant yaw friction predicted by the algorithm. If the
torque needed to bring the yaw system to a hold is bigger than this yaw friction, the system
will keep moving and the constant yaw friction is simply added as a torque against the yaw
movement, with the equation of motion restoring back to equation (9). However, if the forces
fb,yaw are smaller than the yaw friction force, the forces fb ,yaw are applied instead of the
constant yaw friction bringing the yaw system to a stop, such that the yaw system does not
change direction. This is of course compared to the yaw load, ensuring that the yaw system
may change direction if the yaw load itself is large enough to.

 M f M f + M z ,yaw − Fb ,yaw > M f

M f ,c =  (13)
Fb ,yaw M f + M z ,yaw − Fb ,yaw < M f

where Mf is the friction in the yaw system and Mz,yaw is the yaw load on the turbine. Finally if
the yaw movement is stopped by the friction, the vector of system accelerations is updated
with the values found in qa .

4. RESULTS FROM THE FRICTION MODEL

To show the effect of including friction in the model and render probable the validity2 of the
model, some basic results are presented showing the behavior of the system with friction. To
indicate that the friction effect behaves as expected a random sample for a 24 [m/s] Normal
Turbulence Model (NTM) DLC is shown in figure 3, without any additional control or torque
other than the torque from the friction force. The friction torque is set to 1 MNm as a first
iteration guess, based on various indications from wind turbine OEMs. The figure shows the
yaw angle, velocity, acceleration and torque respectively. The relative large angular
movement is due to the fact that the control valve (pos. 12 in figure (1)) is fully open. Hereby it
is possible to see the resulting yaw torques in the turbine tower in the lower right part of the
figure, when the system is allowed to yaw freely. It is clear that the load transferred from the
nacelle to the tower via the yaw system is limited to ±1000 [kNm], namely the yaw friction. As
the control valve is completely open, the only torque transferred to the tower is the friction
force. This may also be noted when comparing yaw position and yaw torque, where the yaw
system is at stand still, whenever the torque is between ±1000 [kNm], whereas the system is

2 No experimental data is available for validating the model.

 −42 12

Yaw acceleration (deg/s2)

−44 8
Yaw angle (deg)

−46 4

−48 0

−50 −4
−52 −8
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10

4 1000

Tower yaw torque (kNm)

Yaw speed (deg/s)

3 500
2
0
1
−500
0
−1 −1000
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (s) Time (s)

Figure 3: Example of yaw states with friction implemented in the system model. The offset in the
position is due to the low yaw stiffness.

accelerating whenever the yaw load is above the given threshold, as may be seen from the
acceleration graph. Hence the friction model achieved with the manipulation of the solver in
the FAST correctly captures the stick-slip motions resulting from the Coulomb friction.
To show the effect of the Coulomb friction relative to a system without friction simulation
results for a 12 [m/s] NTM wind input DLC, for which the effect is most outspoken, is presented
in figure 4.
The case with no friction here resembles an ideal yaw ball/roller bearing. In these
simulations the valve (pos. 12) is closed. As may be seen from the figure, the yaw movement
for the system with no friction has a high number of small oscillations or side to side
movements, which may be expected due to the spring and damper effect included in the
hydraulic system. However, considering the two graphs it seems as the two overall yaw
positions follow each other. From these results, where the friction model shows the stick-slip
effects, it is therefore found that the model may be used for evaluating the possibility to use the
system for self yaw, when friction is included.
It has not been possible to validate the model experimentally as there is a lack of
experimental data regarding the friction in yaw bearings. Should this system be designed based
on a friction yaw bearing it would be necessary to validate the model against measured data. au

1.5

1
Yaw angle (deg)

0.5

0
No friction
−0.5
Friction

−1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time (s)

Figure 4: Example of angular yaw movement with and without friction in the FAST model for a 12 [m/s]
NTM wind input.
5. CONTROL STRATEGY FOR PASSIVE YAW SYSTEM
The idea behind using the system as a passive yaw system, is that instead of actively yawing
the turbine into the wind it is possible to use the loading from the wind, i.e. wind gusts, to turn
the nacelle. The way this is accomplished is by allowing the system to move “freely” at just
the right time, i.e. when the loading of the system is in the right direction, by opening the
control valve (pos. 12 in fig. 2). By opening the control valve at the right time, the high
pressure side and the low pressure side of the motors are short-circuited, hereby allowing
the nacelle to rotate. Denoting the reference state of the control valve by S, with S = 1 being
fully open and S = 0 being closed, the control strategy for the passive yaw system to work
may be described as:

 1 ∆p > 0 ∨d = 1

0 ∆p < 0 ∨d = 1
S =  1 ∆p < 0 ∨d = −1 (14)

0 ∆p > 0 ∨d = −1
0 d =0

where d decides the yaw direction and ∆p is the signed pressure difference over the motors.
Hence when yawing is desired, the valve only opens when the pressure, and hence the load on
the system, is in the right direction to move the nacelle.

6. RESULTS FOR PASSIVE YAW CONCEPT

To illustrate the feasibility of the concept and the sensitivity to the yaw bearing friction and
changing wind conditions, different simulation results are presented in the following. All
simulations are made using the above described FAST-Amesim-Matlab model, where the
system is to follow a reference that changes in the pattern 0° ∅ 5° ∅ 0° ∅ 5° ∅ 0° at times t = 25, t
= 150, t = 300 and t = 400 respectively. Normally this would be in the reversed order, say the
wind direction changes and the nacelle should follow the change, but it is not possible to make
the wind direction change during the simulation. Hence the yaw system is first controlled out
of the wind direction to have an yaw error of 5° and then back again. The procedure is then
repeated for the other direction.
The result of the first simulation is seen in figure 5, which shows the yaw angle, for the case
where no friction is included to the yaw bearing and for DLC 1.1 12 [m/s] NTM. The purpose of
this simulation is simply to validate that it is possible to yaw the system to the desired positions
without putting power into the system.

6
Yaw angle
4 Yaw reference
2
Angle (deg)

−2

−4

−6
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time (s)

Figure 5: Result from self-yaw simulation DLC 1.1 12 m/s NTM.

 Considering the figure showing the reference signal and the actual yaw position there are
a few things to notice. First of all it should be noticed that it is actually possible to yaw the
system to the desired angle and this is done without additional power. The fact that no
additional power is applied also means that the loads on the yaw drives are lowered since they
do not have to yaw up against the wind loads. Further, no additional loads are applied to the
system parts, such as blades, bearings and main shaft. This is due to the fact that the torque
used to turn the nacelle already exists in the system as the load originates from the wind.
Considering the movement of the nacelle it may be seen that the nacelle only moves when the
loads are in the right direction. The reference signal switches to 5° after 25 seconds, but the
nacelle does not move until approx. 10 seconds after. This can also be seen on the movement
after 300 seconds, where the movement stops after the nacelle having turned 2.5°, waiting for
the right conditions and then moving on to the reference angle.

6.1. Friction
Considering the above results these where made for the case, where there is no friction in the
yaw bearing, which may best be approximated by a ball/roller bearing, which is designed to
reduce the friction in the system. However, the possibility to do passive yawing will be highly
dependent on the friction in the yaw bearing, where the higher the friction, the higher
loading it takes from the wind to yaw the turbine. Considering a friction plate bearing, this is
typically designed to introduce “just the right amount of friction in the system”, but also with
these bearings it is a hassle to determine the friction as it is dependent on dirt, temperature
and wear of the system, why it is difficult, not to say impossible, to predict accurately.
The sensitivity to varying friction therefore needs to be taken into consideration. To illustrate
the influence from yaw bearing friction the load case and yaw control scenario from above is
performed with several different friction levels - ranging from 0 to 2 [MNm]. The results are
presented in figure 6.
The figure shows that the higher friction, the longer it takes to yaw the turbine. This is
the case, as the turbine is only able to yaw when the wind load surpasses the given friction
value and in the right direction. This effectively narrows down the window in which the
turbine is able to yaw. Based on the above results the limit is around 1.0 [MNm] for yaw
friction for this solution to work properly for the considered NREL 5MW turbine. If time is
not an issue for minimizing the yaw error 1.5 [MNm] might work as well. Above this limit the
movement of the nacelle is minimal, which will be more outspoken for lower wind speeds
and hence lower loads.

2
Angle (deg)

0
Yaw reference
−2 0.0 MNm
0.5 MNm
1.0 MNm
−4 1.5 MNm
2.0 MNm
−6
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (s)

Figure 6: Result from self-yaw simulation DLC 1.1 12 m/s NTM for different yaw friction levels.
6.2. Wind speed
As mentioned earlier the self-yaw function needs yaw loads from the wind in order to yaw. As
the yaw loads increase with wind speed, a higher torque will also be available to yaw the
nacelle, why the friction in the yaw system plays a less significant role at higher wind speeds.
This may be seen from figure 7, which clearly shows this is the case as the self-yaw system
seems to be operating fine up till 1.5 [MNm] yaw friction for DLC 1.1 24 [m/s] NTM. It should be
noted that there is some time slack in the system, but under normal operating conditions this
is considered acceptable.
Similarly figure 8 shows how the self-yaw function works at DLC 1.1 6 [m/s] NTM with
different yaw friction values. From the figure it may be seen that the loading on the turbine is
not nearly big enough to yaw the turbine when the friction is above 0.5 [MNm], where the
nacelle is effectively at stand still. Even at a friction value of 0.5 [MNm] the system is not able
to reach the reference within the used time frame.
Based on the above results it is clear that depending on the yaw friction and wind speed
it is possible to passively yaw the nacelle. In the case where the friction is too high or
the wind speeds are too low active yawing will be required, which is also possible with the
system presented in figure 1. The passive yaw function is here a supplement for the
standard hydraulic yaw system. The reason for adding the feature of self-yawing at higher
wind speeds is that it dramatically reduces the power needed to yaw the turbine, since

8
Yaw reference
6 0.0 MNm
0.5 MNm
4 1.0 MNm
1.5 MNm
Angle (deg)

2 2.0 MNm

−2

−4

−6

−8
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (s)

Figure 7: Result from self-yaw simulation DLC 1.1 24 m/s NTM for different yaw friction levels.

2
Angle (deg)

0
Yaw reference
−2 0.0 MNm
0.5 MNm
1.0 MNm
−4 1.5 MNm
2.0 MNm
−6
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (s)

Figure 8: Result from self-yaw simulation DLC 1.1 6 m/s NTM for different yaw friction levels.
there is no need to design for active yawing in high load conditions. There is furthermore no
need for the very expensive yaw brakes, and hence the system does not change
configuration between standstill and yawing. The system presented in figure 1 is
furthermore designed as a soft yaw system, which makes the operating conditions for the
hydraulic system much more durable than for the system suggested by Hildingsson [12]. In
relation to the latter, the operating conditions for the system components are investigated
in the following sections.

7. HYDRAULIC SYSTEM BEHAVIOR

Considering the yaw system in general and the passive yaw system in particular, the main
challenge is to find components suited for the operating conditions encountered. The focus is
primarily on the control valve (pos. 12) and the hydraulic accumulators, since these are the
only active hydraulic components in the system besides the motors. As an example the DLC
1.1 25 [m/s] with yaw friction of 1 [MNm] is utilized, which is considered representative for the
cases where there is the highest control action and some of the highest flow rates etc. for the
system.
Figure 9 shows the behavior and flow in the main components in the system. As shown in
the top part of the figure, the self-yawing concept barely follows the reference. However, it
does reach the steady state at 0°, 5°, 0°, −5° and 0° during the simulation. The next graphs in
the figure show the relative valve position and the flow across the valve, where it may be
seen that activity is present when the control signal is favorable for yawing in the right
direction. It should be noted that the valve sometimes “jitter” as the control signal changes
more rapidly than what the valve is able to keep up with. This is the case after for example
200 seconds. This is directly due to the control strategy utilized, which is very simplest on-off
control possible. A better control strategy or even a simple filtering may overcome this
problem, which will be the subject of further studies. Comparing the valve position to the
yaw position it may be seen that the yaw error at this point still is around 2 degrees, why it is
not the control signal from the error that is the cause of the jittering. However, considering
the bottom graph in the figure, which shows the relative accumulator piston displacement
for the two sides, it is obvious that the pressures on the two sides are almost equal at this
point. This also reflects in the flow not being very stable, but coming in small time intervals,
with large flow peaks, whenever one of the two pressures, and hence accumulator piston
positions, change. From the results it may therefore also be seen that the system pressures
approximately equalizes when the control valve opens, leading to a new equilibrium of the
system. Basically this means that the self-yaw system may be utilized to yaw 360 degrees, as
the hydraulic pressures in the system are equalized when the valve is opened at a new yaw
reference point.
Based on the above results and findings, the system is working as expected and the
principle is therefore considered durable. To further analyze this the operation conditions for
a single motor is shown in figure 10.
The top part of figure 10 shows the shaft speed of the hydraulic motors. As seen from
the graph the greatest part of the operating cycle comprise start and stop motion of the
motors. The maximum motor speed is approx. 600 rpm in both directions, which is low
considering the hydraulic motors nominal operating range. Changing the the gear ratio
and number and size of the hydraulic motors may overcome this problem if higher
rotational speeds are desired, but do require consideration to the size of the reflected
inertia and the torque the motors and gears have to withstand. The torque for the given
design may be seen in the lower part of figure 10. The duty cycle is, however, within the
acceptable regions with special designed internal gear motors designed for this kind of
duty cycle.
 8
6 Yaw reference

4
Angle (deg)

2
0
−2
−4
−6
−8
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (s)

1
Relative valve pos (–)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (s)

600

400
Valve flow (l/min)

200

−200

−400

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Time (s)

0.7
Relative piston position (–)

0.65 Accu1
Accu2
0.6
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Time (s)

Figure 9: Graphs of the yaw motion, relative valve opening, flow across the valve and the relative piston
positions in the accumulators respectively. The latter is directly related to the pressures in the system.

Finally figure 11 shows how the motors operate in all four quadrants, whereby the motors
operate as both motors and pumps. The pump operation is caused by the wind gusts driving
the nacelle around and the motor operation is caused by the hydraulic accumulators having
high pressure when the system is yawed from equilibrium.
 600
Shaft speed (RPM) 400
200
0

−200
−400
−600
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (s)

60
Shaft torque (Nm)

40

20

−20

−40

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Time (s)

Figure 10: Motor shaft speed and torque respectively.

80
60
Shaft torque (Nm)

40
20
0
−20
−40
−60
−800 −600 −400 −200 0 200 400 600 800
Shaft speed (RPM)

Figure 11: Operation of the hydraulic motor.

8. SELF-YAW AREA OF OPERATION

Since the self-yaw function utilizes the load from the wind to turn the nacelle into the wind, it
is necessary that the load torque from the wind is in the right direction. Assuming that the
mean load may be used as an indicator of which way the nacelle may be yawed, figure 12
shows how the turbine is self aligning up til approx. 85 degrees yaw angle. Figure 12 is based
on a simplified simulation at 10 [m/s] steady wind and no pitch control. The turbine being self
aligning is not an indicator that the nacelle is stable into the wind, but more an indication that
the nacelle may be moved back into the wind by the self-yaw system until the yaw error is
almost 90 degrees. This means that the turbine is stable into the wind for this particular load
case, which is not always the case as shown next.
 2000
Yaw moment (kNm) 1500
1000
500
0
−500
−1000
−1500
−2000
−100 −80 -60 −40 −20 0 20 40 60 80 100
Yaw angle (deg)

Figure 12: Mean yaw load as a function of yaw angle in 10 m/s steady wind.

8.1. Self-yaw during erection

A huge problem when installing wind farms, especially offshore, is the period between the
erection of the turbine till the turbine is connected to the grid. In this time period, all power
usage must be supplied by local power sources such as batteries, diesel generators etc. This
may be a huge issue since the period between installing the turbine and connecting it to the
grid may be as long as 6 months. As the turbine must be facing the wind at all times it is
necessary to yaw the turbine based on the change in wind direction, why the yaw system is
one of the most important systems which need power in this period. The problem with the
yaw operation is that the power demand for this is very high compared to the rest of the
functions in a wind turbine without grid. One option would therefore be to implement the self-
yaw system to handle the high load situations where it is able to operate, hence being able to
downscale the power supply for the yaw system. This will, however, require a change in
paradigm for how the turbine is operating under these situations, where the blades should not
be pitched completely out of the wind, as discussed below.
Figure 13 shows the yaw torque as a function of yaw angle for a parked turbine, idling with
a blade pitch angle of 78 degrees. As it may be seen, the scenario from figure 12 is turned
upside down, hence making the turbine unstable upwind, as the yaw loads have a positive
gain when the turbine changes position, meaning that the nacelle will be turned downwind.
From the figure it should, however, be noted that the load in this situation is almost a factor 10
smaller than for the situation with production and 10 [m/s] steady wind, this is why it is not
nearly as critical load wise.

300

200
Yaw moment (kNm)

100

−100

−200

−300
−200 −150 −100 −50 0 50 100 150 200
Yaw angle (deg)

Figure 13: Mean yaw load as a function of yaw angle in 12 m/s NTM, idle with pitch angle 78 degrees.
 This indicates that the strategy cannot be used when the turbine is upwind in idling
situations. This is both due to the instability upwind, but also due to the too low value of the
yaw moments. In the area of ±10° there will be alternating loads, meaning that the self-yaw
system could work if the yaw friction was low enough. For the particular case the friction in
the yaw system should, however, have been below 200 [kNm] for the strategy to work, which
is unrealistic low for this to work.
An alternative approach is therefore to place the turbine downwind with the blades partly
pitched in during erection, in which case this concept could prove to be very useful. The
partial pitching is required to overcome the yaw friction, hereby raising the turbine idle speed
and letting the yaw loads increase. The required pitch angle will here be dependent on the
wind conditions and yaw friction in the system, why the yaw friction should potentially be
lowered. Implementing this approach the turbine would, however, be stable and able to follow
the wind direction changes.
If this concept is to work for turbines in the erection phase, new strategies must be
implemented such as lower yaw friction and a downwind rotor plane when the turbine is off-
grid. This yields for a new paradigm within turbine controls during erection and off-grid
operation; loads need to be introduced in order to yaw the turbine into the desired position. This
is in direct opposite to the normal approach, which tries to reduce loads as much as possible.
However, new paradigms are sometimes necessary to meet the ever growing demands for
wind turbines lifetime and performance and there are indications that the OEMs are ready for
this. Examples of this include Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Smart Yaw Concept™, [13], where the
rotor is parked downwind free to rotate or the Condor 5, [6], with its blades, which are parked
vertically and the rotor 90 degrees to the wind direction. Similarly Envisions 2 bladed 3.6 MW
turbine uses partial pitch and last but not least the Mervento 3.6 MW, [5], which utilize hydraulic
cylinders for yawing. In the case where where partially pitched blades and lower yaw friction
is acceptable the above strategy will therefore be feasible.

9. CONCLUSION
The focus of the current paper has been on a hydraulic soft yaw system, which benefits from
being able to passive- or self-yaw under the correct conditions, which has been the topic of the
current paper. A description of the system was first presented, which was the basis for the
analysis of the concept and it self-yawing possibilities. A model of the hydraulic system was
presented along with a friction model, which was implemented and tested in the wind turbine
code FAST. The results from the friction model are considered valid.
Based on the models for the system, the self-yawing capabilities of the concepts were
analyzed for sensitivity against wind and yaw friction, and it was shown that the concept
works in the greater part of the operating area and under certain conditions also under grid
loss. An analysis of the hydraulic yaw system behavior furthermore revealed that the
operation conditions of the system shows a high number of start and stop motions, but this is
within what is acceptable for the hydraulic components. Finally it was examined if the self-
yaw concept is applicable during erection of the turbine, where it was shown that the concept
will work if the turbine is placed downwind, and with the blades not fully pitched out, until the
grid is connected.

REFERENCES
[1] S. Stubkier, H. C. Pedersen, T. O. Andersen, and K. Markussen. Preliminary findings of
soft yaw concept. In Fluid Power and Mechatronics (FPM), 2011 International
Conference on, pages 456–461, aug. 2011.
 [2] S. Stubkier and H. C. Pedersen. Design, Optimization and Analysis of Hydraulic Soft
Yaw System for 5 MW Wind Turbine. Wind Engineering, 35: 529–550, 2011.
[3] Thommy Ekelund. Yaw control for reduction of structural dynamic loads in wind
turbines. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 85: 241–262, 2000.
[4] S. Stubkier and H. C. Pedersen. State of the art-hydraulic yaw systems for wind turbines.
2011.
[5] Mervento. Mervento 3.6-118 the turbine reinvented, 2012.
[6] Condor Wind. Yaw system - yaw control. Web, 12 2012.
[7] T. Edenfeld and T. Siebert. Hydraulic yaw drive system for a wind turbine and method
of opertaing the same; US2011/0206515 A1, 2012.
[8] H. A. Scholte-Wassinik. Apparatus and method for adjusting the yaw of a nacelle of a
wind energy system; EP2402601A2, 2011.
[9] Sten Hildingsson, Vike Hallerudsbacken, and Torbjörn Westing. Wind Turbine Yaw
System (WO 97/22804), 1997.
[10] Glidden S. Doman. Minimization of the effects of yaw oscillations in wind turbines
(US 4515525), 1985.
[11] J. Jonkman, S. Butterfield, W. Musial, and G. Scott. Definition of a 5-MW Reference Wind
Turbine for Offshore System Development. Technical report, NREL, 2009.
[12] Sten Hildingsson and Torbjörn Westin. Yawing system for adjusting a wind turbine into
a required wind direction by turning the turbine about a yawing axle (US 5990568),
1997.
[13] Takao Kuroiwa, Kai Karikomi, Yoshiyuki Hayashi, Masaaki Shibata, and Yoshinori
Ueda. New products and technologies of mitsubishi wind turbines. Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries, Ltd Technical Review, 41, 2004.

View publication stats