Abstract
Understanding the uncertainties of Wind Resource Assessments (WRA) is key to reducing project risks, and this is particularly challenging in mountainous terrain. In the academic literature, many complex flow sites have been investigated, but they all focus on comparing wind speeds from selected wind directions, and do not focus on the overall AEP. In this work, a range of simulations are carried out with seven different wind modelling tools at five different complex terrain sites and the results compared to wind speed measurements at validation locations. This is then extended to AEP estimations (without wake effects), showing that wind profile prediction accuracy does not translate directly or linearly to AEP accuracy. This is firstly because there is a surprisingly large variation in energy production calculation techniques between tools, and secondly because the AEP depends strongly upon the relative strength and occurrence of the wind speed in the most commonly-occurring wind direction sectors. This means that the wind model that produces the most accurate wind predictions for a certain wind direction over a certain time period does not always result in the most suitable model for the AEP estimation of a given complex terrain site. In fact, the large number of steps within the WRA process often lead to the choice of wind model being less important for the overall WRA accuracy than would suggest by only looking at wind speeds. It is therefore concluded that it is vitally important for researchers to consider overall AEP – and all the steps towards calculating it – when evaluating simulation accuracies of flow over complex terrain.
Highlights
Understanding the uncertainties of Wind Resource Assessments (WRA) is key to reducing project risks
This is extended to Annual Energy Production (AEP) estimations, showing that wind profile prediction accuracy does not translate directly or linearly to AEP accuracy. This is firstly because there is a surprisingly large variation in energy production calculation techniques between tools, and secondly because the AEP depends strongly upon the relative strength and occurrence of the wind speed in the most commonly-occurring wind direction sectors. This means that the wind model that produces the most accurate wind predictions 10 for a certain wind direction over a certain time period does not always result in the most suitable model for the AEP estimation of a given complex terrain site
The large number of steps within the WRA process often lead to the choice of wind model being less important for the overall WRA accuracy than would suggest by only looking at wind speeds
Summary
Understanding the uncertainties of Wind Resource Assessments (WRA) is key to reducing project risks. This is challenging in mountainous terrain, e.g. Several previous studies examine and compare the performance uncertainties of different wind modelling tools at moun tainous, or ’complex’ sites, including the Bolund Hill Blind Test (Bechmann et al, 2011; Berg et al, 2011), the Askervain. Hill Blind Test (Bao et al, 2018) and the Perdigão field test (Menke et al, 2019; Barber et al, 2020a). They are all limited to comparisons of wind speeds for chosen wind directions, or to time periods that are much shorter than those required for WRA. A key obstacle is the lack 25 of availability and suitability of relevant validation data
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.