0
Research Papers

A Comparison of Two Pressure Control Concepts for Hydraulic Offshore Wind Turbines

[+] Author and Article Information
Daniel Buhagiar

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Malta,
Msida, MSD 2080, Malta
e-mail: daniel.buhagiar@um.edu.mt

Tonio Sant

Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Malta,
Msida, MSD 2080, Malta
e-mail: tonio.sant@um.edu.mt

Marvin Bugeja

Department of Systems and Control Engineering,
University of Malta,
Msida, MSD 2080, Malta
e-mail: marvin.bugeja@um.edu.mt

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received October 2, 2015; final manuscript received March 7, 2016; published online May 25, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Ryozo Nagamune.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 138(8), 081007 (May 25, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: DS-15-1477; doi: 10.1115/1.4033104 History: Received October 02, 2015; Revised March 07, 2016

Current research in offshore wind turbines is proposing a novel concept of using seawater-based hydraulics for large-scale power transmission and centralized electrical generation. The objective of this paper is to investigate the control of such an open-loop circuit, where a fixed line pressure is desirable for the sake of efficiency and stability. Pressure control of the open-loop hydraulic circuit presents an interesting control challenge due to the highly fluctuating flow rate along with the nonlinear behavior of the variable-area orifice used by the pressure controller. The present analysis is limited to a single turbine and an open-loop hydraulic line with a variable-area orifice at the end. A controller is proposed which uses a combination of feed-forward compensation for the nonlinear part along with a feedback loop for correcting any errors resulting from inaccuracies in the compensator model. A numerical model of the system under investigation is developed in order to observe the behavior of the controller and the advantages of including the feedback loop. An in-depth analysis is undertaken, including a sensitivity study of the compensator accuracy and a parametric analysis of the actuator response time. Finally, a Monte Carlo analysis was carried out in order to rank the proposed controller in comparison to a simple feed-forward controller and a theoretical optimally tuned controller. Results indicate an advantageous performance of the proposed method of feedback with feed-forward compensation, particularly its ability to maintain a stable line pressure in the face of high parameter uncertainty over a wide range of operating conditions, even with a relatively slow actuation system.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Pelton wheel theoretical efficiency curve [21]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Simplified open-loop hydraulic circuit

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Power coefficient look-up surface [24]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Pump mechanical and volumetric efficiencies across the rotor operating angular velocities (6.9–12.1 rpm) at a pressure load of 150 bar

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Fluid element of the NLTV pipeline model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Water hammer effect simulated using one- and four-element NLTV models

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Simplified spear valve geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Spear valve actuator block diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Feed-forward controller block diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

FB-FFC controller block diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Relationship between deviations in area with respect to pressure steady-state error

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Sensitivity analysis results: with fixed discharge coefficient (above) and with fixed orifice diameter (below)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Steady-state nozzle pressure for the different spear-valve actuators using the FB-FFC controller

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Parametric analysis results obtained using the FB-FFC controller

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Histograms of mean wind speeds and turbulence intensities used in the Monte-Carlo analysis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Boxplots of the COE distributions: for all three controllers (left) and for just the FB-FFC and ideal-FFC to allow for a clearer comparison (right)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In