4.7 Article

Development of low-noise drag-type vertical wind turbines

期刊

RENEWABLE ENERGY
卷 79, 期 -, 页码 199-208

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2014.09.047

关键词

Aerodynamic noise; Drag-type wind turbine; Low-noise wind turbine; Savonius wind turbine; Vertical-axis wind turbine; Vortex shedding

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning [NRF-2013R1A1A2012672]
  2. Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning(KETEP) - Korea government Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy [20134030200290]
  3. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [20134030200290] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the aerodynamic noise characteristics of Savonius wind turbines were investigated using hybrid computational aero-acoustics techniques, and low-noise designs were proposed based on the understanding of the noise generation mechanism. First, the flow field around the turbine was analyzed in detail by solving three-dimensional unsteady incompressible Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes equations using computational fluid dynamics techniques. Then, the aerodynamic noise radiating from the wind turbine was predicted using the Ffowcs Williams and Hawkings equation with the obtained flow field information. Two distinct harmonic noise components the blade passing frequency (BPF) and harmonics with a fundamental frequency that is much higher than the BPF were identified in the predicted noise spectrum. The origin of the higher harmonic components was found to be related to vortex shedding from the rotating turbine. Based on this finding, the proposed low-noise design for Savonius wind turbines uses S-shaped blades. S-shaped blades were found to reduce the noise levels of Savonius wind turbines by up to 2.7 dB. (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

4.7
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