sustainability

Article
Wind Resources Assessment and Development of
Grid Connected Wind Farm—A Case Study
Ming-Hong Chen 1, * , Yan-Ting Lin 1 , Pao-Hsiung Chiu 2 , Ching-Chang Cho 3
and Huei Chu Weng 4, *
1 Institute of Nuclear Energy Research, Atomic Energy Council, Executive Yuan, Taoyuan City 32546, Taiwan;
yantinglin@iner.gov.tw
2 Institute of High Performance Computing, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR),
#16-16 Connexis, Singapore 138632, Singapore; chiuph@ihpc.a-star.edu.sg
3 Department of Vehicle Engineering, National Formosa University, Huwei Township,
Yunlin County 632, Taiwan; cccho@nfu.edu.tw
4 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan City 32023, Taiwan
* Correspondence: minghongchen@iner.gov.tw (M.-H.C.); hcweng@cycu.edu.tw (H.C.W.)




Received: 5 October 2020; Accepted: 23 October 2020; Published: 27 October 2020


Abstract: In the present study, the case study of micro-siting for the campus of the Institute of Nuclear
Energy Research (INER) is conducted. Results from the effect of weather data suggest that for the
wind turbine system higher than 20 m, the effect of nearby building and wake on electricity production
would be less important. The effect of different weather data on the generated annual electricity
production (AEP) is consistent for the wind turbine higher than 20 m. The difference between the
calculated and real AEP of INER-150 kW wind turbine is only 1.1%, which is much better than some
previous studies. The good agreement is mainly due to the higher height of the INER-150 kW (50 m),
more stable coming wind and smaller impact of building on the performance of power production.
Considering the proactivity on the installation for the site in INER campus, the finalized decision on
the selection of wind turbine is 1 kW system. The power generation-related data are collected and
processed for the fine tuning of model parameters in the future.

Keywords: wind farm; wind turbine; grid connected

1. Introduction
With limited natural resources, about 99% of the required energy of Taiwan is imported,
putting uncertainties on the economy and energy safety. Developing renewable will alleviate such
situation. Among the potential options, the wind energy and photovoltaic (PV) are the most practical
techniques. For wind energy, we are actively developing the offshore wind farm, with the goal
of 5.7 GW in 2025. Locations suitable for the large and onshore wind turbine have almost been
installed. Large onshore wind turbines are installed along the coastal line of western Taiwan. Thus,
further installation should shift to the inland and urban region.
In summer, tropical cyclones and Asia monsoon is commonly confronted in Taiwan. In winter,
the northeast trade wind is the primary source of wind power for the wind turbine system.
Large-scale wind turbines were installed along the western coastal line of Taiwan. Newly planned
wind farm will turn to inland area with more complex terrain and obstacles. The assessment of wind
resources and micro-siting that should be conducted before the development of wind farm would be
more challenging.
Wind resources evaluation has been conducted for decades and there have been several kinds of
commercial software available on the market. Such programs can be classified as the simple-linear

Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903; doi:10.3390/su12218903 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 2 of 15

and detail-nonlinear model. For the simple-linear, such as the Wind Atlas Analysis and Application
Program (WAsP) model, the overall trend and distribution of wind resources can be obtained in a
short period of time. For the detail-nonlinear model (such as computational fluid dynamics, CFD),
sophisticated set-up of the numerical model and a large amount of computational resources are
required. The comparison of the linear and non-linear model has been made in several studies in
the past. Hillring and Krieg [1] developed the wind atlas by WAsP for a region in Sweden. As the
preliminary study, the resolution was not good, and rough indication can be obtained by this analysis.
They also pointed out that further study with better resolution should be made as the reference for
policy making process. Durak and Sen [2] used WAsP to install 20,600 kW wind turbines in a wind
farm of Turkey with average distance of 150–200 m. They also suggested that the annual electricity
production (AEP) evaluated by WAsP should be reduced by 10% for the effect of the comprehensive
loss. The yielding AEP with the effect of loss was 31–41 GWh.
Berge et al. [3] found that using the CFD models led to insignificant improvement when comparing
to that by WAsP. However, for the site with complex terrain (such as cliff), the superiority was observed
for the CFD model from the study of Palma et al. [4]. Dehmas et al. [5] built the wind atlas by WAsP for
a wind farm in Algeria. Five wind turbines were installed in the model to evaluate AEP. Furthermore,
economic and carbon-reduction analyses were also conducted. Results showed that the simple payback
was about 13.3 years, and the carbon reduction was 8588 tons/year. Carvalho et al. [6] evaluated the
wind resources by Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) and WAsP in two sites located in Portugal
with complex terrain. Results showed that the output data by the mesoscale model should not be
employed mainly due to the lower resolution of the terrain data. Waewsak et al. [7] built the wind
atlas along the coastal regions of Thailand. Optimization was conducted with parameters of wind
turbine capacity and inter-distance of each turbine. Resulted showed that the average wind speed on
the height of 120 m in the coastal regions was about 3.3~5.3 m/s, which is not good when comparing
the value of Taiwan (at least 9 m/s above). With the scope of 90 MW, the calculated AEP was about
170 GWh/year. Lennard et al. [8] employed the Karlsruhe Atmospheric Mesoscale Model (KAMM) and
WRF to compare the generalized wind climate for WAsP for South Africa. Results showed that the bias
among the investigated regions was about 10% by the KANN-based method, while it was about 5% by
the WRF-based method. The WRF model is better suited in the prediction of wind resources for the
regions with complex topography with the expense of longer computational time. A case study for the
wind farm in Ecuador was conducted by Meteodyn and WAsP [9]. Underestimation was observed
for by the comparison with real electricity production for both employed codes. The difference was
about 8.7% for WAsP, and it was 7% for the CFD-based Meteodyn. Thus, after the sophisticated setup
and longer calculation time, improvement of 1.7% on the evaluation of AEP was obtained. From the
above review, it can be concluded that the software-WAsP has been employed for the analysis of wind
resources for many years in several countries. Case studies were made in Europe and Asia, proving
its credibility. Comparing with the computational resources demanded a CFD model, the WAsP is
relatively simple and reliable results can be obtained except for the regions with complex terrain.
For the analyses of Taiwan, a simplified mathematical model was proposed. Chang et al. [10]
firstly evaluate the wind resources for Taiwan in 2003 by a two-stage procedure. By comparing three
wind turbine characteristics (available factor, capacity factor and turbine efficiency), they pointed
out four locations with good wind resources, i.e., Wuchi, Lanyu, Tungchitao, and Hengchun. Later,
the wind atlas of western and coastal region of Taiwan was made by WAsP with only one set of weather
data. Fang [11] assessed the wind energy along the west coast line of Taiwan and Penghu Archipelago
using WAsP. Averaged wind speed and power density with different height among the investigated
locations were presented. The average wind speed in the area of Penghu archipelago is above 10 m/s
and power density is above 1400 W/m2 . A case study was conducted in the Changhua offshore wind
farm by using 180 wind turbines with capacity of 3 MW. The resulting AEP was about 11.3 GWh.
With the feed-in tariff policy for the offshore wind farm, the expected income was about 60 million
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 3 of 15

NTD. For regions far away from the observation side (north and south end of Taiwan), the reliability of
the calculated results might be problematic.
Since the wind farm evaluated for a case of inland of Taiwan area has not yet been conducted
with high spatial precision and local weather data, the purpose of the present study is to conduct a
case study of micro-siting for the campus of the Institute of Nuclear Energy Research (INER). Selected
commercialized wind turbines were virtually installed on the selected locations. The corresponding
AEP of the deployed wind farm within the campus of INER was evaluated. The appropriateness of
the deployment of wind farm is discussed comprehensively. Suggestions are proposed based on the
calculated results. The grid connected wind farm is developed accordingly.

2. Numerical Model
In this study, the commercial software WAsP is employed to evaluate the wind resource and
develop the wind atlas as a case study for the campus of INER. This software was proposed firstly by
Wind Energy and Atmospheric Physics Department at Risø National Laboratory in 1987. It is designed
to process wind data and create a wind atlas. The climate estimation, prediction of wind power and
wind turbine siting can also be made by this software. With implementation in more than 100 countries
around the world for decades, WAsP has become the generally accepted tool for the assessment of
wind sources and turbine siting.
From the literature review, the error of the calculation by WAsP is lower than 10%. Nevertheless,
reliable input data should be provided to ensure results with good quality. Weather data and terrain
map are the most important information for the evaluation by WAsP. The hourly averaged wind speed
and corresponding wind direction collected by the observation site are transformed into statistical data
by WAsP Climate Analyst (WACA) as the observed wind climate file. The frequencies of occurrence of
a specific wind in the designated sectors (wind rose) and wind speed bins are included as the ASCII
text file. The terrain information is edited by the WAsP Map Editor to generate the digital map file for
further calculation.
By importing time sequential wind speed and direction, the statistical wind data can be obtained
and expressed by the Weibull probability density distribution function in Equation (1)
! k−1 "  k #
k V V
p(V )w = exp − , (1)
A A A

where p is the probability of wind speed V, A is the scale parameter, and k is the shape parameter.
The power production is then evaluated by the so-called emergent distribution in WAsP 8 with better
accuracy. In WAsP 7, the combined Weibull distribution was used. In most cases, the difference is not
significant. However, for the case with large sector-wise variation, difference of about 5% might be
encountered. In the present study, the calculation is conducted by WAsP 11 with emergent distribution.
In the proposed model, the local weather data are incorporated with digital map to evaluate the
wind resources. The Shuttle Radar Terrain Mission (SRTM) 90 m Digital Elevation Data is employed in
this study, which is obtained from the Consortium of International Agricultural Research Center-the
Consortium of Spatial Information (CGIAR-CSI). The SRTM files are made by NASA and they have
some void problem. These no-data voids are processed by CGIAR-CSI from the original SRTM DEM.
The comparison is made for the digital elevation model to ensure the quality [12]. The satellite image
from Google Earth is employed to draw the roughness of analyzed terrain. For the comparison and
validation, the public wind atlas from the website of Thousand Wind Turbines Project is introduced [13].
The evaluation of wind resources is conducted by the open sources code-WRF with resolution of 2 km
× 2 km. In this study, the micro-scale-based WAsP model is employed with better grid resolution to
develop the wind atlas for the campus of INER.
Total energy produced by the designated wind turbine system during a one-year period is
generally referred to as the AEP with unit of MWh (for small scale wind turbine system) or GWh
(for large-scale wind turbine system). In the calculation of AEP, it is assumed that the availability of
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 4 of 15
the wind turbine system is 100%, and the losses due to the mechanical and electrical transmission
are not considered. The power produced by the employed wind turbine depends on the speed of
the wind turbine system is 100%, and the losses due to the mechanical and electrical transmission
coming wind. The wind speed at the hub height is usually used as a reference value to describe the
are not considered. The power produced by the employed wind turbine depends on the speed of
performance of a wind turbine. The power curve is defined as the power generated within the
coming wind. The wind speed at the hub height is usually used as a reference value to describe the
operable range of hub height wind speed (from cut-in to cut-out). The generated power increases
performance of a wind turbine. The power curve is defined as the power generated within the operable
with the wind speed as the wind speed is larger than the cut-in value of the wind turbine system.
range of hub height wind speed (from cut-in to cut-out). The generated power increases with the wind
The maximum value of power is also called the rated-power of the wind turbine system. For the
speed as the wind speed is larger than the cut-in value of the wind turbine system. The maximum
wind speed larger than the cut-out value, the turbine will be stopped to prevent the damage on the
value of power is also called the rated-power of the wind turbine system. For the wind speed larger
turbine system.
than the cut-out value, the turbine will be stopped to prevent the damage on the turbine system.
The ratio of the thrust force upon the wind turbine system and the dynamic force of air is
The ratio of the thrust force upon the wind turbine system and the dynamic force of air is generally
generally referred to as the thrust coefficient. This dimensionless coefficient indicates how much the
referred to as the thrust coefficient. This dimensionless coefficient indicates how much the wind turbine
wind turbine system affects the fluid flow as indicated in Equation (2).
system affects the fluid flow as indicated in Equation (2).
2 FT
Ct =
Ct = ππ 2 22 , 2
2FT
(2)
ρρ4 D0D
U00U 0
4 ,
where C t is the thrust coefficient, F t is the thrust force, ρ is
where Ct is the thrust coefficient, Ft is the thrust force, ρ is the the density of air,
density D0 D
of air, is0the diameter
is the of the
diameter of
rotor, U is the speed of coming wind.
0 U0 is the speed of coming wind.
the rotor,
2.1. Employed Wind Turbine Systems
2.1. Employed Wind Turbine Systems
The wind turbine systems of 1 kW, 5 kW, 25 kW, 30 kW and 150 kW are included in the present
The wind turbine systems of 1 kW, 5 kW, 25 kW, 30 kW and 150 kW are included in the
study. The power curves for the employed commercial wind turbine (1 kW and 5 kW) are described in
present study. The power curves for the employed commercial wind turbine (1 kW and 5 kW) are
Figures 1 and 2. The data for the thrust coefficient can be measured via the tower bending moment or
described in Figures 1 and 2. The data for the thrust coefficient can be measured via the tower
estimated by a rotor simulation program. With the given data of the thrust coefficient, the wake loss of
bending moment or estimated by a rotor simulation program. With the given data of the thrust
the investigated wind farm can be estimated. By including the wake loss of the modeled wind farm,
coefficient, the wake loss of the investigated wind farm can be estimated. By including the wake
the calculated AEP will be reasonably reduced. In the present study, these two characteristic curves
loss of the modeled wind farm, the calculated AEP will be reasonably reduced. In the present study,
(power curve and thrust coefficient) are built by the WAsP-Turbine editor. The detail specification of
these two characteristic curves (power curve and thrust coefficient) are built by the WAsP-Turbine
1 kW and 5 kW wind turbine are listed in Table 1.
editor. The detail specification of 1 kW and 5 kW wind turbine are listed in Table 1.

Figure 1. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of 1 kW.

Figure 1. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of 1 kW.

The INER-developed wind turbine system of INER 25 kW (Figure 3) is also included in the present
study (Figure 3). The power curves with different pitch angle are compared in Figure 4. The rated
power is 25 kW at the wind speed of 12 m/s. Other specifications are listed in Table 1.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 5 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 15

Figure 2. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of 5 kW.

Table 1. Specification of all investigated wind turbine systems.

Specification 1 kW 5 kW 25 kW 30 kW 150 kW
Rated power 1000 W 4.8 kW 25 kW 30 kW 150 kW
Cut-in speed 2.5 m/s 3 m/s 4 m/s 3 m/s
Figure 2. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of 5 kW.
3 m/s
Rated windFigure
speed2. Power12curve
m/s and thrust
12 m/s coefficient
12 of
m/sthe turbine of 5 kW. 12 m/s
11 m/s
Survival windTable 1. Specification
speed 50 m/s of all50investigated
m/s wind
22 m/sturbine50 systems.
m/s 25 m/s
Table
RotorSpecification
diameter 1. Specification
1.96 m of all investigated
5.14 m wind
12.46 m turbine systems.
12.5 m 22.8 m
1 kW 5 kW 25 kW 30 kW 150 kW
Blade number
Specification
Rated power
3/5
11000
kWW 3kW
5 kW
4.8 2525
3kW 30 kW
kW 30 3kW 150 kW 1503kW
Tower type
Cut-in
Rated powerspeed Monopile
2.5
1000 W m/s Monopile
3 m/s
4.8 kW Monopile
4 m/s
25 kW Monopile
3 m/s
30 kW 3 Jacket-type
m/s
150 kW
Rated wind speed
Tower 12 mm/s 12 m/s 12 25
m/sm 11 m/s m 12 m/s350m/s
Cut-in height
speed
Survival wind speed
10
2.5 m/s
50 m/s
313m/s
m
50 m/s
4 m/s
22 m/s
324m/s
50 m/s 25 m/s
m
Rated Rotor
winddiameter
speed 121.96
m/sm 12
5.14m/s
m 12 m/s
12.46 m 12.511
m m/s 22.8 m 12 m/s
The INER-developed
Blade number
Survival wind speed wind turbine
3/5
50 m/s system 3 of
50 m/s INER 325
22 m/skW (Figure
350 m/s3) is also
3 25included
m/s in the
present study Tower
(Figure type
3). The Monopile
power curves Monopile
with Monopile
different pitch Monopile
angle are Jacket-type
compared in Figure 4. The
RotorTower
diameter
height
1.96 m
10 m
5.14
13 m
m 12.46 m 24 12.5
25 m m
m 50 m22.8 m
rated power Blade
is 25 kW at the wind speed
number 3/5 of 12 m/s. 3 Other specifications
3 are
3 listed in Table3 1.
Tower type Monopile Monopile Monopile Monopile Jacket-type
Tower height 10 m 13 m 25 m 24 m 50 m

The INER-developed wind turbine system of INER 25 kW (Figure 3) is also included in the
present study (Figure 3). The power curves with different pitch angle are compared in Figure 4. The
rated power is 25 kW at the wind speed of 12 m/s. Other specifications are listed in Table 1.

Figure
Figure 3.
3. Institute
Institute of
of Nuclear
Nuclear Energy
Energy Research
Research (INER)
(INER) 25
25 kW
kW wind turbine system.
wind turbine system.

Besides the previously mentioned wind turbine systems, another commercial 30 kW wind turbine
from the UK is also included in the present study as the comparison with that developed by indigenous
company. Its power curve is presented in Figure 5. The specification of the employed 30 kW wind
turbine is listed in Table 1.
Figure 3. Institute of Nuclear Energy Research (INER) 25 kW wind turbine system.
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 6 of 15

Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15

Figure 4. Power curve of INER 25 kW wind turbine system.

Besides the previously mentioned wind turbine systems, another commercial 30 kW wind
turbine from the UK is also included in the present study as the comparison with that developed by
indigenous company. Its power
Figure curve curve
4. Power is presented
of INER in
25 Figure
kW wind5. turbine
The specification
system. of the employed 30
Figure 4. Power
kW wind turbine is listed in Table 1. curve of INER 25 kW wind turbine system.

Besides the previously mentioned wind turbine systems, another commercial 30 kW wind
turbine from the UK is also included in the present study as the comparison with that developed by
indigenous company. Its power curve is presented in Figure 5. The specification of the employed 30
kW wind turbine is listed in Table 1.

Figure 5. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of 30 kW [14].

Figure 5. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of 30 kW [14].
Finally, the INER-developed 150 kW wind turbine (Figure 6) is also included in the present study.
Finally, the INER-developed 150 kW wind turbine (Figure 6) is also included in the present
The characteristic curves for the existed turbine INER 150 II for the calculation are presented in Figure 7,
study. The characteristic curves for the existed turbine INER 150 II for the calculation are presented
and the specification of the 150 kW wind turbine is listed in Table 1.
in Figure 7, and the specification of the 150 kW wind turbine is listed in Table 1.
Figure 5. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of 30 kW [14].
2.2. Employed Weather Data
Finally,
Two setsthe INER-developed
of weather 150 kW and
data are available wind turbine in
employed (Figure 6) is also
the present included
study, namely,inHall-039
the present
and
study. The
Hall-048. characteristic
The curves for
location of Hall-039 the existed
is relatively turbine
close to theINER
25 kW 150 II for
wind the calculation
turbine, are presented
while Hall-048 is inside
in Figure
the 7, andwind
designated the specification
farm and nextof to
the150
150kW
kWwind
windturbine.
turbine However,
is listed inthe
Table 1.
completeness of Hall-039
(96%) is better than that of Hall-048 (62%). The reduction of completeness for both sites is due to
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 7 of 15

the regular power-off in the campus of INER with more locally switch-off experiment for the site of
Hall-048 and
Sustainability
Sustainability nearby
2020,
2020, wind
12, x FOR
12, x FOR turbines.
PEER
PEER
REVIEW
REVIEW
7 of 15
7 of 15

Figure 6. INER 150 kW wind turbine system.

Figure 6. INER 150 kW wind turbine system.

Figure 7.
Figure Power curve
7. Power curve and
and thrust
thrust coefficient of the turbine of INER 150 II.
Figure 7. Power curve and thrust coefficient of the turbine of INER 150 II.

2.2. Employed Weather Data

2.2. Employed Weather Data
Two sets of weather data are available and employed in the present study, namely, Hall-039
Two sets of weather data are available and employed in the present study, namely, Hall-039
and Hall-048. The location of Hall-039 is relatively close to the 25 kW wind turbine, while Hall-048
and Hall-048. The location of Hall-039 is relatively close to the 25 kW wind turbine, while Hall-048
is inside the designated wind farm and next to 150 kW wind turbine. However, the completeness of
is inside the designated wind farm and next to 150 kW wind turbine. However, the completeness of
 Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15

Hall-039(96%)
Hall-039 (96%)isisbetter
betterthan
thanthat
thatofofHall-048
Hall-048(62%).
(62%).TheThereduction
reductionofofcompleteness
completenessforforboth
bothsites
sitesisis
Sustainability
duetotothe 2020,
theregular 12, 8903
regularpower-off
power-offininthethecampus
campusofofINER INERwithwithmore
morelocally
locallyswitch-off
switch-offexperiment
experimentfor 8 ofthe
for 15
due the
siteofofHall-048
site Hall-048and andnearby
nearbywind
windturbines.
turbines.
After the statistical
After statistical treatment
treatment of the the collected
collected time
time series weather
weather data,
data, the
the wind
wind roses
roses are
are
After the statistical treatment of ofthe collected time seriesseries
weather data, the wind roses are presented
presented
presented in Figures 8 and 9. For the distribution, the measured year-averaged wind speed for the
in Figures in Figures
8 and 9. For8 the
anddistribution,
9. For the distribution,
the measured the measured year-averaged
year-averaged wind speed for wind speed
the site for the
of Hall-048
site
site of Hall-048 (with height of 10 m) is 2.4 m/s, mainly from the direction of north. The
(withofheight
Hall-048
of 10(with height
m) is 2.4 of 10 m)
m/s, mainly fromisthe 2.4direction
m/s, mainly from
of north. Thethe direction of
year-averaged north.
wind speed Thefor
year-averagedwind
year-averaged windspeed
speedfor forthe
thesite
siteofofHall-039
Hall-039(with
(withheight
height of1515m)m)isisabout
about3.04
3.04m/s,
m/s,mainly
mainly
the site of Hall-039 (with height of 15 m) is about 3.04 m/s, mainlyoffrom the north-east direction.
fromthe
from thenorth-east
north-eastdirection.
direction.

Figure 8.
Figure 8. Statistical
Statistical results
results for
for the
the site
site of
of Hall-048.
Hall-048.
Figure 8. Statistical results for the site of Hall-048.

Figure 9. Statistical
Figure 9. Statistical results
results for
for the
the site
site of
of Hall-039.
Hall-039.
Figure 9. Statistical results for the site of Hall-039.
From
Fromthe the macro-aspect,
themacro-aspect,
macro-aspect,these these two
thesetwo sites
twosites are
sitesare very
arevery close
veryclose to
closeto each
toeach other.
eachother. Thus,
other.Thus, the
Thus,the deviation
thedeviation
deviationon on the
onthe
the
From
weather data might mainly be because of the insufficient height for the site of Hall-048 and surrounding
weather
weather data might
data might mainly
mainly be because
be because of the
of the insufficient
insufficient height
height for the site of Hall-048 and
trees affecting
surrounding the flow
trees fiend the
affecting and windfiend
flow speed. It should
and wind be noted
speed. It thatfor
shouldthethe
data
be
site
noted
of Hall-048
of Hall-039
that are
the
and
more
data
surrounding
complete with trees affecting
longer the while
distance, flow fiend
Hall-048andiswind
insidespeed.
the It should be
investigated noted
wind that
farm theless
with ofof
datadata.
Hall-039are
Hall-039 aremore
morecomplete
completewith withlonger
longerdistance,
distance,while
whileHall-048
Hall-048isisinside
insidethetheinvestigated
investigatedwind
wind
In
farmthewith
present
lessstudy,
data. both
In thesets of weather
present study, data
both will
sets be
ofemployed
weather to evaluate
data will be the possibletorange
employed of AEP
evaluate the
farm
for with
the less data. In
investigated the farm.
wind present study, both sets of weather data will be employed to evaluate the
possible range of AEP for the investigated
possible range of AEP for the investigated wind farm. wind farm.
3. Results
3.3.Results
Results
In this study, a methodology is proposed for the evaluation of the grid-connected wind farm in
Inthis
In thisstudy,
study,aamethodology
methodologyisisproposed
proposedfor forthe
theevaluation
evaluationofofthe thegrid-connected
grid-connectedwind windfarm
farminin
the campus of INER. For the evaluation, the following steps should be conducted accordingly:
the campus of INER. For the evaluation, the following steps should be
the campus of INER. For the evaluation, the following steps should be conducted accordingly: conducted accordingly:
1. Develop the
the evaluation
evaluation model
model including
including the
the effect
effect of buildings
1.1. Develop
Develop the evaluation model including the effect ofofbuildings
buildings
2.
2. Wind farm
Wind farm deployment
deployment
2. Wind farm deployment
3. Evaluation of AEP according to the planned deployment
4. Build wind farm (in INER campus for the present study)
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 9 of 15

3. Evaluation of AEP according to the planned deployment

4.
5. Build windoperation
Long term farm (in INER campus
(at least for the present study)
one year)
5. Long term operation (at least one year)
6. Comparison of AEP (calculated value vs. real wind farm)
6. Comparison of AEP (calculated value vs. real wind farm)
7. Parameters correction and model improvement
7. Parameters correction and model improvement
In this study, the first four steps are conducted. The rest of the steps are expected to be competed
In this study, the first four steps are conducted. The rest of the steps are expected to be
in the mid of 2021.
competed in the mid of 2021.
3.1. Micro-Sitting in INER Including Whole Campus
3.1. Micro-Sitting in INER Including Whole Campus
In this section, the model of the micro-siting for the campus of INER is extended to the full campus
In this section, the model of the micro-siting for the campus of INER is extended to the full
as indicated in Figure 10. The entire campus of INER is classified into several small blocks for the
campus as indicated in Figure 10. The entire campus of INER is classified into several small blocks
calculation. Regions with a large number of trees are modeled as porous material by setting the value
for the calculation. Regions with a large number of trees are modeled as porous material by setting
of porosity as 0.5 as indicated in Figure 10 with a yellow rectangle. For the region at the upper right
the value of porosity as 0.5 as indicated in Figure 10 with a yellow rectangle. For the region at the
regions, some buildings outside the range of INER are also included in the proposed model under the
upper right regions, some buildings outside the range of INER are also included in the proposed
consideration of completeness. The coordinate system is built with the original point set in the bottom
model under the consideration of completeness. The coordinate system is built with the original
left corner. The faraway buildings and lower trees are not considered since their impact on the results
point set in the bottom left corner. The faraway buildings and lower trees are not considered since
of power production would be insignificant.
their impact on the results of power production would be insignificant.

Figure 10. Full range of INER campus.

Figure 10. Full range of INER campus.
In Figure 11, the layout of the modeled buildings is indicated. Buildings are built as the black
In Figure 11, the layout of the modeled buildings is indicated. Buildings are built as the black
rectangles with zero porosity, and trees are built with blue rectangles with porosity of 0.5 as suggested
rectangles with zero porosity, and trees are built with blue rectangles with porosity of 0.5 as
from the User Menu of WAsP 11. The locations of the 25 and 150 kW horizontal axis wind turbine
suggested from the User Menu of WAsP 11. The locations of the 25 and 150 kW horizontal axis
(HAWT) are indicated as the originally existing system. For the newly installed wind turbine, the 1 kW,
wind turbine (HAWT) are indicated as the originally existing system. For the newly installed wind
5 kW and 30 kW HAWT systems are employed. Three new wind turbines are virtually installed near
turbine, the 1 kW, 5 kW and 30 kW HAWT systems are employed. Three new wind turbines are
the wall of the INER campus next to the 150 kW wind turbine.
virtually installed near the wall of the INER campus next to the 150 kW wind turbine.
Calculated distributions of wind speed by the proposed WAsP model at the height of 6 m and
12 m are presented in Figure 12. The distribution of wind speed at the height of 6 m is significantly
influenced by the nearby buildings. It is expected that the AEP of a wind turbine with hub height
below 10 m will significantly decrease. At the height of 12, the speed reduction zones are smaller since
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 10 of 15

the heights2020,
Sustainability of the
12, xmajority
FOR PEERbuildings
of INER are about 10 m. Therefore, the performance for planned
REVIEW 10 of 15
wind turbine with hub height higher than 10 m should be better.

Figure 11. Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP) model with planned wind farm.

Calculated distributions of wind speed by the proposed WAsP model at the height of 6 m and
12 m are presented in Figure 12. The distribution of wind speed at the height of 6 m is significantly
influenced by the nearby buildings. It is expected that the AEP of a wind turbine with hub height
below 10 m will significantly decrease. At the height of 12, the speed reduction zones are smaller
since the heights of the majority buildings of INER are about 10 m. Therefore, the performance for
planned wind turbine with hub height higher than 10 m should be better.
Figure 11. Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP) model with planned wind farm.
Figure 11. Wind Atlas Analysis and Application Program (WAsP) model with planned wind farm.

Calculated distributions of wind speed by the proposed WAsP model at the height of 6 m and
12 m are presented in Figure 12. The distribution of wind speed at the height of 6 m is significantly
influenced by the nearby buildings. It is expected that the AEP of a wind turbine with hub height
below 10 m will significantly decrease. At the height of 12, the speed reduction zones are smaller
since the heights of the majority buildings of INER are about 10 m. Therefore, the performance for
planned wind turbine with hub height higher than 10 m should be better.

Figure
Figure 12. Velocity distributions
12. Velocity distributions at
at different
different heights
heights by
by WAsP
WAsPmodel.
model.
3.2. Effect of Obstacle on Wind Turbine—25 kW
In this section, the performance of INER 25 kW wind turbine is investigated. The purpose of
this discussion is to make sure that the WAsP model can properly evaluate the AEP for the wind
turbine system overlapped with the obstacles for building. The hub height of INER 25 kW wind
turbine is 25 m, and the height of the building is 10 m. It is expected that the AEP of wind turbine
higher than surrounding building should not be affected. If the WAsP model cannot work properly,
however, abnormalFigure
or even
12.zero AEPdistributions
Velocity would be encountered. Results
at different heights by are
WAsPshown in Figure 13. The AEP
model.
 3.2. Effect of Obstacle on Wind Turbine—25 kW
In this section, the performance of INER 25 kW wind turbine is investigated. The purpose of
this discussion is to make sure that the WAsP model can properly evaluate the AEP for the wind
turbine system overlapped with the obstacles for building. The hub height of INER 25 kW wind
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 11 of 15
turbine is 25 m, and the height of the building is 10 m. It is expected that the AEP of wind turbine
higher than surrounding building should not be affected. If the WAsP model cannot work properly,
however,
of INER-25 abnormal
kW-P05 or and
is 46 even67
zero
MWhAEPdepending
would be encountered.
on employed Results are shown
weather in Figure
data, while it is13. Theabout
only
AEP of INER-25 kW-P05 is 46 and 67 MWh depending on employed weather data, while it is only
12 MWh for the condition of P35. Thus, the power production for the wind turbine installed within the
about 12 MWh for the condition of P35. Thus, the power production for the wind turbine installed
range of building still can be qualitatively evaluated via the proposed model.
within the range of building still can be qualitatively evaluated via the proposed model.

Figure 13. Annual electricity production (AEP) with different pitch angle for 25 kW wind turbine.
Figure 13. Annual electricity production (AEP) with different pitch angle for 25 kW wind turbine.
The performance of INER 25 kW is generally suppressed due to safety concerns. As indicated
The performance of INER 25 kW is generally suppressed due to safety concerns. As indicated
in Figure 13, the AEP of the case of P05 is only 25% lower that of the 150 kW wind turbine, while it
in Figure 13, the AEP of the case of P05 is only 25% lower that of the 150 kW wind turbine, while it
is significantly reduced
is significantly reducedto to
about
about1212MWh
MWh with pitchangle
with pitch angleofof3535 degrees
degrees which
which is employed
is employed during
during
mostmost
of the of the operation. For the effect of employed weather data, higher AEP can be obtained with the
operation. For the effect of employed weather data, higher AEP can be obtained with
weather data of Hall-039,
the weather and a much
data of Hall-039, and a lower
much value
lower is observed
value whenwhen
is observed switching to that
switching of Hall-048.
to that of
For the reduction
Hall-048. from
For the Hall-039
reduction fromtoHall-039
Hall-048, to it is 57% for
Hall-048, it is the
57%150
for kW wind
the 150 kWturbine, and itand
wind turbine, is 31%
it for
is 31% for 25 kW P05. The reduction is only 6% for 25 kW P35 since
25 kW P05. The reduction is only 6% for 25 kW P35 since its performance is highly suppressed.its performance is highly
suppressed.
Considering the pros and cons of these two sets of weather data (better location for Hall-048 and
Considering for
higher completeness the Hall-039),
pros and consbothofofthese
thesetwo
twosets
dataof sets
weather data (betterfor
are employed location for Hall-048
the evaluation of wind
and higher completeness for Hall-039), both of these two data sets are employed for the evaluation
farm performance in the next section. Deviation is expected on the calculated AEP. Result will be
of wind farm performance in the next section. Deviation is expected on the calculated AEP. Result
employed to identify a possible range of generated AEP for the deployed wind farm for the site of
will be employed to identify a possible range of generated AEP for the deployed wind farm for the
INERsite campus.
of INER campus.

3.3. Wind Farm Deployment

In the investigation of the effect of wind turbine on AEP of designated wind farm, different kind of
wind turbines are virtually installed at the selected locations. The locations available for the installation
of wind turbine in INER are limited due to the restriction of Building Act. The alternative option is to
install the newly introduced wind turbine on the existed tower. Therefore, in the present investigation,
the location of wind turbines is fixed with different rotor parameter (performance curve and hub
height) to investigated its effect on the production of AEP. Calculated results are compared in Figure 14.
The self-developed wind turbines can be employed for the comparison of AEP. The INER-25 kW
wind turbine is constantly operated under the experimental conditions to test some developing control
strategy. Thus, it is more appropriate to employ the AEP of INER-150 kW for the comparison of AEP
with that of WAsP model. The predicted AEP for the 150 kW wind turbine is from 90.6 and 38.3 MWh
and the real AEP (after the statistical process) is 89.6 MWh. The difference is only 1.1%. This indicates
 3.3. Wind Farm Deployment
In the investigation of the effect of wind turbine on AEP of designated wind farm, different
kind of wind turbines are virtually installed at the selected locations. The locations available for the
installation
Sustainability of8903
2020, 12, wind turbine in INER are limited due to the restriction of Building Act. The 12 of 15
alternative option is to install the newly introduced wind turbine on the existed tower. Therefore, in
the present investigation, the location of wind turbines is fixed with different rotor parameter
that the predictedcurve
(performance AEPand
by the
hub proposed model is consistent
height) to investigated its effect onwith experimental
the production dataCalculated
of AEP. by using the
weather data
results ofcompared
are Hall-039.in Figure 14.

Figure Comparison
14.14.
Figure ComparisonofofAEP
AEP with differentwind
with different windturbine
turbine systems.
systems.

The AEP is about 600 to

The self-developed wind700turbines
kWh by canusing the 1 kW
be employed forwind turbine, which
the comparison of AEP.might be the most
The INER-25
appropriate
kW wind forturbine
those existing support
is constantly towers.
operated under The
theAEP difference
experimental using different
conditions weather
to test some data is also
developing
control strategy.
insignificant for the 1 kW Thus,windit isturbine
more appropriate
system. to employ the AEP of INER-150 kW for the
comparison
When of AEPthe
introducing with that wind
5 kW of WAsP model.
turbine The predicted
system, AEP for theincreases
the AEP obviously 150 kW wind
from 13turbine
to 24isMWh.
from 90.6 and 38.3 MWh and the real AEP (after the statistical process) is 89.6
The generated AEP due to the switch of weather data from Hall-039 to Hall-048 increases, which is MWh. The difference
is only 1.1%. This indicates that the predicted AEP by the proposed model is consistent with
opposite to the following two investigated cases. Such variation is also observed in the case of 1 kW
experimental data by using the weather data of Hall-039.
with very small increment.
The AEP is about 600 to 700 kWh by using the 1 kW wind turbine, which might be the most
For the casefor
appropriate of 30 kW,existing
those the corresponding
support towers. AEP Theincreased from 43
AEP difference to 89
using MWh (sum
different weatherof three
data iswind
turbines). The AEP drastically
also insignificant for the 1 kW decreases when
wind turbine switching the weather data from Hall-039 to Hall-048,
system.
which is consistent with thethe
When introducing cases
5 kW of wind
INER-25
turbinekWsystem,
and INER-150
the AEP kW.obviously increases from 13 to 24
For the evaluation of AEP, the mechanical and electrical
MWh. The generated AEP due to the switch of weather data from Hall-039 transmission loss to
should alsoincreases,
Hall-048 be evaluated.
Fromwhich is opposite
a surveyed studytoforthea following
planningtwo windinvestigated cases. Such
farm in Taiwan, variation transmission
the electrical is also observed lossin is
theabout
casethe
2%, and of 1mechanical
kW with veryloss smallis increment.
about 14.7%. Thus, the average loss combining these two effects is
For the
about 16.7%. Thecase of 30 kW,loss
mechanical theiscorresponding
site-dependent. AEPFurther
increased from 43 to with
comparison 89 MWhactual(sumAEPof should
three be
wind turbines). The AEP drastically decreases when switching the weather data from Hall-039 to
conducted to fine tune the value of these mentioned losses.
Hall-048, which is consistent with the cases of INER-25 kW and INER-150 kW.
Considering the proactivity on the installation for the site in INER campus, the finalized decision
For the evaluation of AEP, the mechanical and electrical transmission loss should also be
on the selectionFrom
evaluated. of wind turbine
a surveyed is 1for
study kW system. wind
a planning The finalized wind the
farm in Taiwan, farm is shown
electrical in Figure 15.
transmission
The hub height is 6 m for the right-side wind turbine with three blades. For the middle wind turbine,
its hub height is also 6 m with five blades. On the left side, the hub height is 10 m with three blades.
Different hub heights and blade number are intentionally selected to investigate its effect on the
performance of individual wind turbine and entire wind farm. The installation of wind turbine is
completed, and power generation-related data are collected via the supervisory control and data
acquisition (SCADA) system.
Continuous operation of the developed wind farm will be conducted, and the power
production-related data will be collected for the validation of the numerical model in the future.
Figure 15. The hub height is 6 m for the right-side wind turbine with three blades. For the middle
wind turbine, its hub height is also 6 m with five blades. On the left side, the hub height is 10 m
with three blades. Different hub heights and blade number are intentionally selected to investigate
its effect on the performance of individual wind turbine and entire wind farm. The installation of
Sustainability
wind turbine 12,completed,
2020,is 8903 13 of 15
and power generation-related data are collected via the supervisory
control and data acquisition (SCADA) system.

Figure 15. Developed 3 kW wind farm in INER campus.

Figure 15. Developed 3 kW wind farm in INER campus.
4. Discussion
Continuous operation of the developed wind farm will be conducted, and the power
In the present study, the AEP is evaluated by using different capacity of wind turbine from
production-related data will be collected for the validation of the numerical model in the future.
1 kW to 150 kW. Besides the commercial type, the self-developed wind turbine systems are also
included.
4. Discussion Comparing the main specification of the investigated wind turbine systems, the most
obvious difference is the survival wind speed of the self-developed wind turbines. As an experimental
In the
facility, present
smaller study,wind
survival the AEP
speedisisevaluated by using
intentionally different
designed capacity
to protect the of wind blades
turbine turbineandfrom the1
kW to 150 kW. Besides the commercial type, the self-developed wind turbine
support structure. The effect of the designated lower survival wind speed (22 m/s and 25 m/s) on the systems are also
included. Comparing
performance the main
of the deployed windspecification
farm would of be the investigated
insignificant sincewind turbine
the hourly systems,
averaged thespeed
wind most
obvious difference is the survival wind speed of the self-developed
is generally lower than the survival wind speed for the investigated site of the present study. wind turbines. As an
experimental facility, smaller survival wind speed is intentionally designed
In the investigation for the effect of obstacle on the 25 kW wind turbine, the AEP of the to protect the turbine
blades and the
investigated INER support
25 kWstructure.
is observed The effect of
properly theifdesignated
even it is installedlower survival
within wind speedbuilding
the representative (22 m/s
block. With aggressive pitch angle (P05), its AEP is only 25% lower than that of the 150 kWhourly
and 25 m/s) on the performance of the deployed wind farm would be insignificant since the wind
averaged
turbine wind speed
system. is generally
The competence oflower than theWAsP
the proposed survivalmodelwind speed for
is verified forthe
theinvestigated
calculation ofsite
AEPof the
for
present study.
a wind turbine system located within building block.
In the
For the investigation
validation of the for proposed
the effectWAsP
of obstacle
model,on thethe 25 kW between
difference wind turbine, the AEPand
the calculated of real
the
investigated
AEP of INER-150INERkW 25 wind
kW is observed
turbine properly
is only even if
1.1%, which it is installed
is much within
better than somethe representative
previous studies
(8.86% [9] and 10% [2]). The consistent result is mainly due to the higher hub height of the INER-15 kW
wind turbine system. At the height of 50 m, the coming wind is more stable, and the effects of trees
and building on the flow field and power production are also smaller.
Comprehensive comparison is made for wind farm deployment. Based on the presented results,
it is deduced that the hub heights of 1 kW and 5 kW are not enough and the performance of the wind
turbine is significantly affected by the surrounding trees, buildings and nearby wake flow. For the
wind turbine system with height higher than 20 m, the effect of nearby building and wake would be
less important. The effect of different weather data on the generated AEP is consistent for the wind
turbine higher than 20 m.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 14 of 15

The newly developed wind farm will be continuously operated. The comparison and revision
with the proposed numerical model can be conducted with the one-year-long data. Furthermore, it is
also suggested to conduct the case study outside the INER campus via the proposed methodology in
the future to promote the development of renewable energy for Taiwan. The effects of the mechanical
and the electrical transmission losses on AEP are not considered in the present study. From a referred
case study, the mechanical and electrical transmission losses are suggested. But the applicability should
be verified, and parameters should be adjusted by comparing the calculated value against the real
power production of the investigated wind farm in the future.

5. Conclusions
The case study of micro-siting for the campus of INER was conducted. Selected commercialized
wind turbines and self-developed systems were virtually installed on the selected locations.
The corresponding AEP of the deployed wind farm within the campus of INER was evaluated.
The appropriateness of the deployment of wind farm was discussed comprehensively.
The effect of buildings on the flow field of wind and the performance of wind turbine was
discussed. The performance of wind turbine installed within a grouped building was also investigated.
Different weather data were also introduced and the corresponding AEP were evaluated for the
comprehensive evaluation for wind farm deployment.
Considering the proactivity on the installation for the site in INER campus, the finalized decision
on the selection of wind turbine is a 1 kW system. The installed wind farm is completed. Different hub
heights and blade number were intentionally selected to investigate its effect on the performance of
individual wind turbine and entire wind farm. The installation of the wind turbine is completed,
and power generation-related data were collected via the SCADA system. The proposed numerical
model will be fine-tuned via the comparison of the experimental data in the future.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.-H.C., Y.-T.L., P.-H.C. and H.C.W.; methodology, M.-H.C.;
software, M.-H.C.; validation, M.-H.C., Y.-T.L. and C.-C.C.; formal analysis, M.-H.C. and C.-C.C.; investigation,
M.-H.C.; resources, M.-H.C., and Y.-T.L.; data curation, M.-H.C.; writing—original draft preparation, M.-H.C.;
writing—review and editing, M.-H.C., P.-H.C., C.-C.C. and H.C.W.; visualization, M.-H.C.; supervision, Y.-T.L.,
P.-H.C. and H.C.W.; project administration, M.-H.C.; funding acquisition, Y.-T.L. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by Ministry of Science and Technology ROC, grant number 108-3116-F-042A-006.
(Ming-Hong Chen, Yan-Ting Lin and Huei-Chu Weng)
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Hillring, B.; Krieg, R. Wind energy potential in southern Sweden—Example of planning methodology.
Renew. Energy 1998, 13, 471–479. [CrossRef]
2. Durak, M.; Şen, Z. Wind power potential in Turkey and Akhisar case study. Renew. Energy 2002, 25, 463–472.
[CrossRef]
3. Berge, E.; Gravdahl, A.R.; Schelling, J.; Tallhaug, L.; Undheim, O. Wind in complex terrain. A comparison of
WAsP and two CFD-models. Proc. EWEC 2006, 27, 10.
4. Palma, J.M.L.M.L.M.; Castro, F.A.; Ribeiro, L.F.; Rodrigues, A.H.; Pinto, A.P. Linear and nonlinear models in
wind resource assessment and wind turbine micro-siting in complex terrain. J. Wind. Eng. Ind. Aerodyn.
2008, 96, 2308–2326. [CrossRef]
5. Dehmas, D.A.; Kherba, N.; Hacene, F.B.; Merzouk, N.K.; Merzouk, M.; Mahmoudi, H.; Goosen, M.F. On the
use of wind energy to power reverse osmosis desalination plant: A case study from Ténès (Algeria).
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 956–963. [CrossRef]
6. Carvalho, D.; Rocha, A.; Santos, C.S.; Pereira, R. Wind resource modelling in complex terrain using different
mesoscale–microscale coupling techniques. Appl. Energy 2013, 108, 493–504. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 8903 15 of 15

7. Waewsak, J.; Chaichana, T.; Chancham, C.; Landry, M.; Gagnonc, Y. Micro-siting Wind Resource Assessment
and Near Shore Wind Farm Analysis in Pakpanang District, Nakhon Si Thammarat Province, Thailand.
Energy Procedia 2014, 52, 204–215. [CrossRef]
8. Lennard, C.; Hahmann, A.N.; Badger, J.; Mortensen, N.G.; Argent, B. Development of a Numerical Wind
Atlas for South Africa. Energy Procedia 2015, 76, 128–137. [CrossRef]
9. Ayala, M.; Maldonado, J.; Paccha, E.; Riba, C. Wind Power Resource Assessment in Complex Terrain:
Villonaco Case-study Using Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis. Energy Procedia 2017, 107, 41–48.
[CrossRef]
10. Chang, T.; Wu, Y.-T.; Hsu, H.-Y.; Chu, C.-R.; Liao, C.-M. Assessment of wind characteristics and wind turbine
characteristics in Taiwan Assessment of wind characteristics and wind turbine characteristics in Taiwan.
Renew. Energy 2003, 28, 851–871. [CrossRef]
11. Fang, H.-F. Wind energy potential assessment for the offshore areas of Taiwan west coast and Penghu
Archipelago. Renew. Energy 2014, 67, 237–241. [CrossRef]
12. Jarvis, A.; Rubiano, J.; Nelson, A.; Farrow, A.; Mulligan, M. Practical Use of SRTM Data in the
Tropics—Comparisons with Digital Elevation Models Generated from Cartographic Data; International Centre for
Tropical Agriculture: Cali, Colombia, 2004.
13. Industrial Technology Research Institute. Thousand Wind Turbines Project. Available online: http:
//www.twtpo.org.tw/intro.aspx?id=462 (accessed on 18 August 2020).
14. AEOLOSH 30KW. Available online: https://en.wind-turbine-models.com/turbines/1864-aeolos-aeolos-h-
30kw (accessed on 18 August 2020).

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).