4.8 Article

Feasibility study of a hybrid wind turbine system - Integration with compressed air energy storage

期刊

APPLIED ENERGY
卷 137, 期 -, 页码 617-628

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.06.083

关键词

Wind turbine; Compressed air energy storage; Hybrid system; Mathematical modelling; Control strategy

资金

  1. Advantage West Midlands [EP/K002228/1]
  2. European Regional Development Fund [EP/K002228/1]
  3. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/L019469/1, EP/K002228/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. EPSRC [EP/L019469/1, EP/K002228/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wind has been recognized as one of major realistic clean energy sources for power generation to meet the continuously increased energy demand and to achieve the carbon emission reduction targets. However, the utilisation of wind energy encounters an inevitable challenge resulting from the nature of wind intermittency. To address this, the paper presents the recent research work at Warwick on the feasibility study of a new hybrid system by integrating a wind turbine with compressed air energy storage. A mechanical transmission mechanism is designed and implemented for power integration within the hybrid system. A scroll expander is adopted to serve as an air-machinery energy converter, which can transmit additional driving power generalized from the stored compressed air to the turbine shaft for smoothing the wind power fluctuation. A mathematical model for the complete hybrid process is developed and the control strategy is investigated for corresponding cooperative operations. A prototype test rig for implementing the proposed mechanism is built for proof of the concept. From the simulated and experimental studies, the energy conversion efficiency analysis is conducted while the system experiences different operation conditions and modes. It is proved that the proposed hybrid wind turbine system is feasible technically. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据