Department of Mechanical Engineering & Material Sciences

A Compact, Closed Form Solution for the

Optimum, Ideal Wind Turbines

David A. Peters
McDonnell Douglas Professor of Engineering
dap@wustl.edu

Ramin Modarres
Graduate Research Assistant
ramin.modarres@wustl.edu

1
 References
• Manwell, J. F., McGowan, J. G., and Rogers, A. L., Wind Energy Explained: Theory, Design and
Application––Second Edition, John Wiley and Sons, West Sussix, 2009, pp. 91-101, 117-123.

• Johnson, Gary L., Wind Energy Systems, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1985, pp. 124-136.

• Eggleston, David M. and Stoddard, Forrest S., Wind Turbine Engineering Design, Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, New York, 1987, pp. 15-29.

• Garcia-Sanz, Mario and Houpis, Constantine H., Wind Energy Systems, CRC Press, Boca Raton,
FL, 2012, pp. 81-292.

• Abramowitz, Milton and Stegun, Irene A., Handbook of Mathematical Functions, Dover
Publications, Inc., New York, NY, 1970, p. 17.

• Glauert, H., Aerodynamic theory: A General Review of Progress, Vol. IV, Chapter Division L.,
Airplane Propellers. Dover Publications, Inc. New York, NY, 1963, pp. 169-368.

• Barocela, Edward, "The Effect of Wake Curvature on Dynamic Inflow for Lifting Rotors," Master
of Science Thesis, Washington University in St. Louis, May 1997.

• Makinen, Stephen M., Applying Dynamic Wake Models to Large Swirl Velocities for Optimum
Propellers, Doctor of Science Thesis, Washington University in St. Louis, May 2005.

2
Rotor Inflow Geometry

3
 Background

u  aU , v  ar

a(1  a)
=r2
a(1  a)

4
 Background

 r 3 
dCP  8a(1  a )  2  dr
 

(1  a )(4 a  1) 2
(1  3a)
r2 = , a 
(1  3a) (4a  1)

16a  24a  (9  3 )a   1  0
3 2 2
r
2
r

5
 Background

 1 a  1  a 
  tan 
1
 = tan  r 
 r (1  a)   a

6
 Background

x  0.25
8  64 5 4
CP  2 
x  72 x  124 x  38 x  63x  12  ln( x)  
4 3 2

729  5 x x 13a0

7
Alternative Approach

V 2 =U 2 +  r   w2
2

U U   r   w2  rw
2 2

sin( ) 
U   r 
2 2

 r  U   r   w2  Uw
2 2

cos( ) 
U 2   r 
2

8
Alternate Approach

  1   b
2 2
r
2

1  r2  b2  r b v
sin( )  
1  r2
w

r 1  r2  b2  b u
cos( )  
1  r2
w

9
 Momentum Theory

dL  2 (2 rdr )wU  w cos( )

dP  2 (2 rdr )wU  w cos( )  r  sin( )

dCP  8r b 1  b cos( )  sin( )rdr

1
16 z  24 z  9 z 
3 2
0
1  r 
2

Where:
𝑧 = 𝑏2 / 1 + 𝜆2𝑟

10
 Momentum Theory

 1  r2   
 2 1 
1  1  r  
2
b 
2
 1  cos   cos  2 

 2   
 3 3  1  r 

1  1 1  1  r 
2

 1  2cos   cos  2 
b  3 3  1  r 

1 1 1  1  r 
2
 1 1  1  r 
2

 1  cos  cos  2 
 3 sin  cos  2 
b  3  1  r   3  1  r 

The axial and swirl induction factors:

𝑎 = 𝑏𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜙)
𝑓 = 𝑏𝑠𝑖𝑛(𝜙)

11
Complete Expressions

1  b 1  2b 
r 
3b  1

1
b
1  2cos( )

12
Complete Expressions

1  b 3b  1
sin( ) 
2b

1 b
cos( ) 
2b

13
 Complete Expressions


1  1   2

   cos 
1 r
2 
3 3  1  r 

cos 2 ( )  sin 2 ( )  cos( ) 1

r  =
sin( ) 1  2cos( )  tan  3 2 

14
 Complete Expressions

1 b cos( )
a  b cos( )  =
2 1  2cos( )

b  1  2a
f b sin( ) sin( )
a   
r r r 1  2cos( ) 

Total flow at the blade in terms of b:

  1  r  b 
2 2 2 b 2
1 b
3b  1

15
Wake Induction Parameters as a Function of Local Speed Ratio

16
Optimized Inflow Angle as a Function of Local Speed Ratio

17
Optimized Inflow Angle as a Function of 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 of Initial Inflow Ratio

18
Optimum Power Coefficient

2(1  b)2 (1  2b)r d r

dCP  2(1  b) (1  2b)rdr 
2

2

6b2 1  2b 
r d r  db
 3b  1
2

0.5


2
12  b(1  2b)(1  b) 
CP    db
2  (3b  1) 
b0
Where: 1 2 < 𝑏0 < 1 3

19
 Optimum Power Coefficient

y1


 
 4
2
 4  y0 2
CP     2   3  9 y  2 y  dy
 27    y0  4 1  2 y0    y 
0y

Where: 𝑦1 = 1 2 and 0< 𝑦0 < 1 2

20
 Optimum Power Coefficient

  1 2 
 y ln(2 y )  (1  2 y )  (1  2 y)  
16 1  2 y   457 51 2 y 3 3  2 
CP  1 y y  
27  y   1280 640 160 2 (1  2 y )3 
 1  
 4   


21
 Torque Coefficient

CP  3 3y 
𝑃 = 𝑄Ω CQ = =CP  
 
  4  y 1  2 y  

  1 
 y ln(2 y )  (1  2 y )  (1  2 y ) 2  
8 3 y  457 51 2 y 3 3  2 
CQ  1 y y  
9  y 3  1280 640 160 2 (1  2 y ) 3

1    
 4  

22
 Thrust Coefficient

dT  2  2 rdr  wU  w cos( ) cos( )

2 1  b2  r d r
dCT  8b 1  b cos( ) cos( )rdr =
2

0.5
b 2 1  2b  1  b 2 

12
CT = db
  3b  1
2 2

b0

23
 Thrust Coefficient

 1 
8  55 17 2 1 3 4 
y  ln  2 y   1  2 y  

CT = 1  y y  y  
  1  2 y 
2
y 768 192 64
9 1    
 4   

24
Power Coefficient as a Function of Tip Speed Ratio

25
Torque Coefficient as a Function of Tip Speed Ratio

26
Thrust Coefficient as a Function of Tip Speed Ratio

27
 Optimal Chord and Pitch

8 r
c 1  cos( )   Ref.1
BCl

  Bc   2
dL  2  w U  w cos( )  2 rdr         2
2
 U r w

Cl dr
 2 

8 r 1  b cos( )  BcCl (1  r2  b2 )

28
Optimal Chord and Pitch

4 r   3b  1  16 rb 2  1 
c    
BCl  b  BCl  1  r  
2
 

Bc 8 1 2 
2
2
  
2 r Cl Cl

29
Optimum Chord Distribution

30
 Effect of Profile Drag

  Cd  
Cl cos( )  Cd sin( )  Cl cos( ) 1    tan( ) 
  Cl  

  Cd  
Cl sin( )  Cd cos( )  Cl sin( ) 1    cot( ) 
  Cl  

31
 Effect of Profile Drag

0.5 3


12 b 1  2b 1  b 
2
2
Thrust Integral  IT  db
 2 3

b0
 3b  1 2

0.5 3


b 1  2b  1  b  1  b 
2 2
12 2
Power Integral  I P  db
2 5

b0
 3b  1 2

32
 Effect of Profile Drag

4y  1 3 4 2 8 1 8  2
IT   y  y  y    y  4y
3  y  4 1  2 y 
2
 6 3 3 3 3y 

 4  321
2ln   
  y  2   y  4 y  32 
2
  

33
 Effect of Profile Drag

    1 
  ln 1 
1  2 y    (1  2 y ) 
1 
  2 99     2  y   y  y  4   3 
IT   y  y  4  y  9 y   48 y  
6 3  y  4   4  1  2 y 
2
 
  

 
 


107  18 y  y  4   45 32 y  8 y 
2 y( y  4) 
  64 

y 



 
+
3  36  113 y  38 y 2  16 y3  9  7  2 y  y( y  4)  3  3 y  y  4  
  

34
 Effect of Profile Drag

4y  4 4 17 3 133 2 89 104 16  2
IP   y  y  y  y  13   2  y  4y
9 3  y  4 1  2 y 
2
 15 15 45 9 9y 9y 

 ( y  2)  y 2  4 y  1023 
8ln   
 
 4  80 

35
Effect of Profile Drag

16
IP  
27
27  32 3
IP 
54(1   2 )

C 
CTT  CT [ Eq.  41]   d  IT
 Cl 
C 
CPN  CP [ Eq.  35]   d  IP
 Cl 

36
Thrust Coefficient as a function of Tip Speed
Ratio Including the Effect of Profile Drag

37
Power Coefficient as a function of Tip Speed
Ratio Including the Effect of Profile Drag

38
 Summary & Conclusions

• An alternate derivation is provided for the parameters of an

optimum, ideal wind turbine, Unlike previous derivations, only a
single momentum theory is used (in the direction of the local lift)
so that there are no separate accounts of axial and angular
momentum.

• The results, also unlike previous results, are found in closed form
for all variables—and the singularities of previous numerical
solutions are eliminated explicitly. Although the final parameters
for the optimum turbine are no different from those of
conventional approaches, the closed-form nature of the results
yields insight into the properties of the optimum turbine

39
 Summary & Conclusions

• Finally, because of the single momentum balance, it is quite

straightforward also to write a closed-form expression for the
optimum blade chord distribution. The true optimum does not
become singular at the blade root, but rather approaches a
combination of solidity and pitch angle that avoids blade-to-
blade interference.

40