Klim, Denmark Case study. - EMD
Klim, Denmark Case study. - EMD
Klim, Denmark Case study. - EMD
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Klim</strong>, <strong>Denmark</strong>, CASE - 01<br />
Wake loss (%)<br />
18<br />
16<br />
14<br />
12<br />
10<br />
8<br />
6<br />
4<br />
2<br />
0<br />
1<br />
Comparison WindPRO-Windfarmer based on Silstrup98 selection of wind data<br />
and <strong>Klim</strong> Fjordholme wind farm with 35 x 600 kW Vestas V44<br />
3<br />
5<br />
7<br />
9<br />
11<br />
13<br />
15<br />
17<br />
19<br />
21<br />
23<br />
WTG-number<br />
25<br />
27<br />
29<br />
31<br />
33<br />
35<br />
Avg<br />
Wake Loss, WindFarmer<br />
(Eddy Viscosity)<br />
Wake loss-WindPRO (WDC<br />
0,075)<br />
Actual array loss<br />
Figure 16 The Eddy Viscosity model in the standard set up perform poorer than the N. O.<br />
Jensen model (used in WindPRO and WAsP) in standard set-up based on the <strong>Klim</strong> test data. It<br />
calculates 1percent point less losses than WindPRO, where it is obvious that the real losses is<br />
higher eventhoug the wake losses not can be measured direct, the patterns gives a quite good<br />
idea. If the loss level were decreased 1 percent point, WTG 10 would have no Wake loss at all.<br />
Figure 17 The used set-up of the Eddy Viscosity model in Windfarmer. No parameter variations<br />
have been tested within this model.<br />
Data delivery and acknowledgements<br />
Thanks to Vestas and Nordjyllandsværket (Power plant for Northern Jutland which<br />
own and operate the wind farm) for being very helpful and for delivering data.<br />
Thanks to Kevin Romuld, EAPC, North Dakota for helping with Windfarmer<br />
calculations for comparison.<br />
Energi- og Miljødata, Niels Jernesvej 10, DK-9220 Aalborg O – Tel: +45 9635 4444, Fax: +45 9635 4446, Mail:<br />
emd@emd.dk, Web: www.emd.dk - 15 -
Change language