4.7 Article

Wind turbine layout optimization with multiple hub height wind turbines using greedy algorithm

Journal

RENEWABLE ENERGY
Volume 96, Issue -, Pages 676-686

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2016.05.018

Keywords

Wind farm; Layout optimization; Multiple hub heights; Greedy algorithm; Complex terrain

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51506056]
  2. International Scientific and Technological Cooperation Program of China [2011DFG13020]
  3. Program for Young Excellent Talent in Tongji University [2014KJ025]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Wind turbine layout optimization in wind farm is one of the most important technologies to increase the wind power utilization. This paper studies the wind turbine layout optimization with multiple hub heights wind turbines using greedy algorithm. The linear wake model and the particle wake model are used for wake flow calculation over flat terrain and complex terrain, respectively. Three-dimensional greedy algorithm is developed to optimize wind turbine layout with multiple hub heights for minimizing cost per unit power output. The numerical cases over flat terrain and complex terrain are used to validate the effectiveness of the proposed greedy algorithm for the optimization problem. The results reveal that it incurs lower computational costs to obtain better optimized results using the proposed greedy algorithm than the one using genetic algorithm. Compared to the layout with identical hub height wind turbines, the one with multiple hub height wind turbines can increase the total power output and decrease the cost per unit power output remarkably, especially for the wind farm over complex terrain. It is suggested that three-dimensional greedy algorithm is an effective method for more benefits of using wind turbines with multiple hub heights in wind farm design. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available