Turbine Control Strategies for Wind Farm Power ... - IEEE Xplore

2015 American Control Conference Palmer House Hilton July 1-3, 2015. Chicago, IL, USA

Turbine Control Strategies for Wind Farm Power Optimization Mahmood Mirzaei, Tuhfe Göçmen, Gregor Giebel, Poul Ejnar Sørensen and Niels K. Poulsen

Abstract— In recent decades there has been increasing interest in green energies, of which wind energy is the most important one. In order to improve the competitiveness of the wind power plants, there are ongoing researches to decrease cost per energy unit and increase the efficiency of wind turbines and wind farms. One way of achieving these goals is to optimize the power generated by a wind farm. One optimization method is to choose appropriate operating points for the individual wind turbines in the farm. We have made three models of a wind farm based on three difference control strategies. Basically, the control strategies determine the steady state operating points of the wind turbines. Except the control strategies of the individual wind turbines, the wind farm models are similar. Each model consists of a row of 5MW reference wind turbines. In the models we are able to optimize the generated power by changing the power reference of the individual wind turbines. We use the optimization setup to compare power production of the wind farm models. This paper shows that for the most frequent wind velocities (below and around the rated values), the generated powers of the wind farms are different. This means that choosing an appropriate control strategy for the individual wind turbines will result in an increased power production of the wind farm.

I. I NTRODUCTION Wind turbines are the most common wind energy conversion systems. Even though they are able to compete with fossil fuels at some favorable areas, it is necessary to develop the technology in order to gain an edge on a big scale and reduce the power production price. On the individual wind turbines, the production price can be reduced by maximizing the generated power and minimizing the dynamic loads, thereby increasing the energy production on the life span of the turbine. However because of the aerodynamics interaction [1], maximizing wind turbine powers individually does not lead to a maximized power on the wind farm scale. For example in an early work [2], the authors have shown a wind farm controller can in fact increase the energy. Different methods for maximizing the produced power of a wind farm is suggested. For example in [3] and [4] the wake interaction is minimized by finding suitable tip speed ratio and pitch angle for individual wind turbines. The results show an increase in the produced power compared to the normal operation case. In [5] and [6] the focus has also been on wind farm control taking loads into account. In [4] This work is supported by the Possible Power Project funded by the Danish Council for Strategic Research. M. Mirzaei, Tuhfe Göçmen, Gregor Giebel and Poul Ejnar Sørensen are with the Department of Wind Energy, Technical University of Denmark, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark {mmir, tuhf, grgi,

posq}@dtu.dk N. K. Poulsen is with the Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark [email protected]

978-1-4799-8684-2/$31.00 ©2015 AACC

a simple yet widely used wake model is employed to model the wake effect, while [3] uses a finite volume discretization of the Navier-Stokes equation for the wind flow model. In another method which is presented in [7], the authors suggest deflecting wakes by yaw-misalignment in order to reduce their effect on the downstream wind turbines. As mentioned earlier, it is possible to optimize the power produced in a big wind farm by choosing appropriate operating points for the wind turbines (WTs) in the farm. The method we suggest here is to give individual WTs a power reference which means instead of setting the turbine to produce maximum power, down-regulate or de-rate the wind turbine. Wind turbine can be down-regulated with different control strategies. A control strategy basically determines the steady state operating point of a wind turbine as a functions of wind speed [8]. The focus of this paper is to choose an approrpiate control strategy in order to maximize the generated power of a wind farm. Down regulating or de-rating a wind turbine in the full load region is straightforward. For down regulation in this region, it is sufficient to modify the generated power set point by changing the reaction torque of the generator while keeping the rotational speed set point at its rated value. This strategy is the industry standard. Nevertheless, this strategy results in a rough transition between the partial load and the full load regions, especially when the wind speed increases or decreases rapidly [9]. These transitions subsequently increase the dynamic loads on the turbine. Another strategy to down regulate a wind turbine is to change both the rotational speed and the generated power set points. It is shown that the latter makes a smooth transition from the partial load to the full load region [10]. Results for a third strategy which keeps the benefits of the former strategy and provides a smoother transition between the full load and the partial load is also given. An analysis of the dynamic loads and actuator activities for the three strategies is given in [10]. In this paper we will use steady state models of wind turbines obtained from the three different strategies to build three wind farm models. Thereafter, the wind farm models will be used for power optimization. The produced power from the three wind farm models although in similar conditions, namely layout, wind speed and wind direction, prove to be different for a specific interval of wind speeds values. We will show that choosing appropriate control strategies for individual wind turbines in the wind farm will result in increased power production. The outline of the paper is as follows: We will start by explaining control strategies for active power control of wind turbines. We will discuss three different down regulation control strategies in section

1709

II. In section III we will present the wind farm model. This section contains the wake model, the steady state model of the wind turbines and the wind farm layout. In section IV the optimization setup is presented and results of difference simulation scenarios are given.

Constant pitch

Tip speed ratio [-]

12

II. C ONTROL STRATEGIES

Max-

10 8

Const-Ȝ

Max Cp

6

Control strategy of a wind turbine determines its steady state operating points and the conditions of its transition from the partial load region to the full load region [8]. More specifically by control strategy we mean choosing appropriate steady state values for the rotational speed of the rotor and the generated power as functions of wind speed. This subsequently determines steady state values for the pitch of the blades and the reaction torque of the generator. The choice of the control strategy has a big influence on the operation of the turbine because as we will see in the next section, it determines the position of the operating points on the Cp curve as wind speed changes. Therefore it can determine the operating region of the turbine with respect to e.g. the stall region and also change the dynamics of the turbine. The method of switching from the partial load region to the full load region is also part of the control strategy. The switching method has a big influence on the transient loads on the turbine around the rated wind speed where the turbine experiences the biggest loads. In this section we will explain three different down regulation control strategies. A. Control strategies for down regulation In the nominal operation of a multi-megawatt wind turbine, normally the rated rotational speed is reached at wind speeds below the rated wind speed, and therefore there is a region where the rotational speed is kept constant while the generated power is maximized. However when down regulating, there are cases where the power reference R is reached for wind speed vd at a rotational speed ωd before the turbine has reached the rated rotational speed ωrated (ωd < ωrated ). Obviously one control objective for wind speeds bigger than vd is to keep the generated power constant at R (the power reference). However there is a degree of freedom on how to choose the set point of the rotational speed. When the turbine reaches the power set point, it should not keep the maximum value of the Cp curve. An appropriate Cp value is obtained by choosing blade pitch θ and the rotational speed of the rotor. The rotational speed together with the wind speed determines the tip speed ratio (TSR) λ = rω/ve , in which r is the rotor radius. The different methods on how to change the rotational speed as a function of the wind speed and how to change the operating point on the Cp curve determines the different down regulation strategies. To the best of our knowledge, the industry standard of down regulation after reaching the reference power is to keep the pitch value constant and let the rotational speed change until it reaches the rated value. In the mean while the controller keeps the generated power at its reference value. As soon as the rotational speed reaches the rated value, the pitch controller is activated and regulates

Const- -8

-6

-4

-2 0 Pitch [degrees]

2

4

6

Fig. 1: A contour curve for Cp = 0.4, different points on the curve show the different control strategies for down regulating wind turbines

the power and the rotational speed. We call this strategy the constant pitch strategy, see figure 1. In this paper we examine three additional approaches. For each wind speed, the turbine should choose a specific Cp value which is calculated as R/Pw (ve ). Pw (ve ) is the total available power on the rotor disc for wind speed ve . This means for each wind speed there is a level curve on the Cp surface that satisfies the demanded power. See for example figure 1 in which contour curve of Cp = 0.4 is plotted. Different control strategies are actually different methods to choose the blade pitch and the tip speed ratio on this level curve. 1) Maximizing the rotational speed (Max-Ω): In this control strategy when the generated power by wind turbines reaches R, we solve the following optimization problem: maximize

ω(λ, θ)

subject to

ω ≤ ωrated ω ≥ ωmin

Cp (λ, θ) = R/Pw

This means that the rotational speed of the turbine is maximized for each wind speed and it is bounded by the rated rotational speed. When we reach the rated rotational speed, λ and θ are found uniquely. In figure 2 the red curve with square markers shows the steady state points of the tip speed ratio and the blade pitch for different wind speeds and demanded power of 0.5M W . In practice we might never down regulate a wind turbine to 10% of its capacity, however we have chosen this value only for demonstration purposes. 2) Constant rotational speed (Const-Ω): In this control strategy we keep the rotational speed constant after we have reached R. Therefore λ becomes a unique function of wind speed as λ(ve ) = Rωd /ve . Having the λ(ve ), we can find the pitch of the blade on the contour curve of figure 1. Normally two values for the pitch is found, one in the normal operating side of the Cp curve, which we choose and one in the stall region. In figure 2 the blue curve with triangle markers shows the steady state points of the tip speed ratio and the blade pitch of this strategy for different wind speeds. 3) Constant tip speed ratio (Const-λ): In this control strategy we keep the tip speed ratio constant after we have

1710

A. Steady state model of the wind turbine

λss [−]

15 10 5

-15

-10

-5

0

5

15 10 Θss [degrees]

20

25

30

35

Fig. 2: Steady state loci of the Cp on the Cp curve as wind speed changes for the three different control strategies. red-squares is the maximum ω strategy, green-circles is the constant λ strategy and blue-triangle is the constant ω strategy

ΩSS [rad/s]

1.4 1.2 1 0.8

0

5

15 10 Wind speed [m/s]

20

25

Fig. 3: Steady state values of the rotational speed as a function of the wind speed for the different strategies. red-squares is the maximum ω strategy, green-circles is the constant λ strategy and blue-triangle is the constant ω strategy

reached R at λ = λmax until we reach the rated rotational speed. Thereafter the tip speed ratio is found as λ(ve ) = Rωrated /ve . Having the λ, we can find the pitch of the blade on the contour curve of figure 1. Again as already mentioned in the previous section, there are two values for the pitch and we choose the one which is on the normal operation side of the turbine. In figure 2 the green curve with circle markers shows the steady state points of the tip speed ratio and the blade pitch of this strategy for different wind speeds. III. W IND FARM MODEL In this section the wind farm models which are used for optimization and simulation will be presented. The wind farms consist of the steady state models of the 5MW reference wind turbine [11] and a wake model which determines the wake effects on the downstream wind turbines. This means that we develop three different wind farm models based on three different wind turbine control strategies explained in the previous section. Details of modeling and the nonlinear model of the wind turbines are given in [12]. Each wind turbine model in the wind farm gets a wind speed (hub height wind speed) and a power set point and returns the generated power, the rotational speed, Cp and Ct values of the operating point. The Ct values are used in the wake models to calculate wind speed on the down-stream wind turbines.

The models used in this paper are a steady state model of the 5MW reference wind turbine [11]. We have used both the dynamic models and the steady state models of the wind turbines, however since in this work the transient responses are not important we only give the analysis based on the steady state models. The steady state values of the rotational speed, the generated power and the Cp and Ct for three different control strategies are found. Details of the control strategies and the steady state curves are given in [10]. Figure 2 compares the loci of the Cp for the three different control strategies as wind speed changes. In this figure and figure 3 the reference power is 10% of the nominal capacity. As mentioned eralier, in reality we might not down-regulate a wind turbine to 10% of its nominal power and these figures are only for demonstration purposes and to show the difference between the three control strategies. Figure 3 shows the steady state values of the rotational speed as a function of wind speed for the three control strategies. Using the explained strategies we have set up three different wind farm models which we call 1) WFM-Const-Ω, 2) WFMMax-Ω and 3) WFM-Const-λ. WFM-Const-Ω is the name of the wind farm model that uses Const-Ω control strategy on individual wind turbines. The same naming method is used for WFM-Max-Ω and WFM-Const-λ. B. Wake Modeling The wake modelling is a sub-discipline of fluid dynamics that is focused on the aerodynamics of the flow behind the wind turbine(s). There are mainly two physical phenomena of interest in the wake: 1) the momentum (or velocity) deficit which causes a reduction in the power output of the downstream turbines 2) the increased level of turbulence which gives rise to unsteady loading on downstream turbines. These wake-induced power losses and blade loadings are studied in two regions within the wake namely near and far wake. The near wake starts right after the turbine and extends to 2-4 diameters downstream. In that region, the flow is highly characterized by the rotor geometry which leads to the formation of blade tip vortices. In addition to these tip vortices, because the turbine extracts momentum and energy from the flow, there exist steep gradients of pressure and axial velocity, and expansion of the wake. In the far wake on the other hand, the effects of the rotor geometry are limited to the reduced wind speeds and increased turbulence intensities. In fact, the turbulence is the dominating physical property in the far wake [13]. In addition to the rotor induced turbulence, the region further downstream is under the influence of the large scale (or atmospheric) turbulence. The turbulence mixing accelerates the wake recovery in terms of both the velocity deficit and the turbulence intensity. In far downstream, the velocity deficit approaches to a Gaussian profile which is axisymmetric and self-similar [14], [15] . Moreover, the meandering of the wake might also contribute to the recovery of the velocity deficit whereas significantly increasing the unsteady loading on the downstream turbine(s). All these concepts and assumptions lead to different approaches used

1711

v2 5D

v3

v4

5D

5D

Generated power (MW)

v1

v5 5D

Fig. 4: Wind farm layout (for illustration)

40 30 20 10 0

C. The wind farm layout This is a simple simulation case, therefore a simple wind farm with 10 wind turbines in a row is considered. The wind direction is such that the wind turbines are in the full wake of the front row turbines. The distance between the turbines are considered to be 5D as shown in figure 4. The following formula is used to calculate wind speed on each wind turbine: vk+1 = f (vk , x) k = 1, ..., N − 1

(1)

in which f (.) determines the wake deficit. The wake deficit is calculated using the N.O. Jensen wake model explained in [16]. vk is the wind speed on kth wind turbine and x is the distance between wind turbine k and k + 1. v1 is given to the simulation model. IV. O PTIMIZATION In this section the objective is to maximize the power generated by the whole wind farm. The optimization is achieved by choosing appropriate power references (Ri ) for the individual wind turbines: N X maximize Pi (Ri ) (2) R

i=1

Subject to: Rmin ≤ Ri ≤ Rmax (3) T in which R = R1 R2 . . . RN . Pi (the power generated by ith wind turbine) depends on the power reference value Ri and wind speed vi . While vi depends on the wind speed and the power reference values of the upstream wind turbines. Rmin and Rmax are the minimum and maximum power reference values, respectively. Obviously we set Rmax to 5M W (or any bigger value). On real wind turbines normally Rmin is specified, so there is a limit on how much we can down-regulate a wind turbine. Nevertheless we relax this constraint here and set it to zero. As mentioned earlier, in order to make the optimization problem simpler we decided to use a wind farm model that only consists of a row of wind turbines. Besides, in this paper the aim is to emphasize the effect of the control strategies on the power produced by a wind farm. As for the optimization method, we have used both the gradient descent with random initial values and genetic algorithm. We concluded that the genetic algorithm gives better results since it is very difficult with the gradient descent method to avoid the local optimum points.

2

4

6

12 8 10 wind speed [m/s]

14

16

18

Fig. 5: Power curves of the three wind farm models, solid blue is WFM-Const-Ω, red dash-dot is WFM-Const-λ and green dashed is WFM-Max-Ω

Increase in power (MW)

in the development of wake models and out of many, the N.O. Jensen Model has been used in this study. For more details on the wake model see [16].

0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 -0.2

5

10

15 wind speed [m/s]

20

25

Fig. 6: Solid blue curve shows the difference in produced power between WFM-Const-Ω and WFM-Max-Ω, red dashed curve shows the difference in produced power between WFM-Const-Ω and WFM-Const-λ

A. Results The optimization setup is used with different wind speed values at the upstream wind turbine. Three optimizations are performed for the three different wind farm models, explained in II-A. It is observed that the optimized power produced by the three with farm models give different results. For the high wind speeds, where the whole wind farm can produce the rated capacity, no optimization is needed and the output of the three wind farm models are the same. Figure 5 is the power curve of the whole wind farm. The curve is plotted for the values of the wind speed where there is a difference between the generated power for different wind farm models. As it is seen in this figure for low wind speeds the power produced by the Const-Ω strategy (the WFM-Const-Ω model) is more than the other two strategies. The difference can be best observed in figure 6. Figure 6 shows that at the rated wind speed, the wind farm WFMConst-Ω produces almost 1M W more than WFM-Max-Ω and 400kW more than WFM-Const-λ wind farms. It is also seen from figure 6 that for wind speeds below 6m/s and above 18m/s the produced powers are the same. Figure 7 shows the optimization results for v1 = 13m/s. In this figure wind turbine numbers are on the x-axis, and number one is the most upstream turbine. Each bar shows the amount of power that the corresponding wind turbine generates. For each wind turbine number, there are three

1712

GA optimization Constant ref. at 5M W Constant ref. at 2.5M W WFM-Const-Ω power reference WFM-Max-Ω power reference WFM-Const-λ power reference

Const-Ω 17.309 15.272 16.681 17.309 17.034 17.303

Max-Ω 16.608 15.272 16.189 16.559 16.608 16.478

5

Const-λ 17.057 15.271 16.319 16.776 16.841 17.057

TABLE I: Coparison of the generated power of the three wind farm models farm for different simulation scenarios

Generated Power (MW)

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 3 2 1 0

2

1

0

1

3

2

4

6 5 7 Wind turbines

8

9

10

Fig. 8: The generated power with Ri = 5M W, i = 1, . . . , 10, individual wind turbine powers of the three wind farm models, WFM-Const-Ω is Blue, WFM-Max-Ω is green and WFM-Const-λ is red

3

3

1

2

3

4

5 7 6 Wind turbines

8

9

10

Fig. 7: The result of the optimization scenario, individual wind turbine powers of the three wind farm models, WFMConst-Ω is Blue, WFM-Max-Ω is green and WFM-Const-λ is red



4

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

2

3

4

7 5 6 Wind turbines

8

9

10

Fig. 9: The generated power with Ri = 2.5M W, i = 1, . . . , 10, individual wind turbine powers of the three wind farm models, WFM-Const-Ω is Blue, WFM-Max-Ω is green and WFM-Const-λ is red

other two wind farm models. B. Discussion Figure 10 shows Cp = 0.4 contour curve and different values for the Ct curve. As mentioned in section II-A a control strategy basically determines a criteria to choose the operating point of the wind turbine on this contour curve. According to the figure, different operating points with the same Cp value can have different Ct values. Ct value basically determines the wake deficit and shape, therefore choosing an operating point with smaller Ct value will result in smaller wake deficit on the downstream wind turbines. If

12

Tip speed ratio [-]

bars with different colors that correspond to the different wind farm models. The figure shows that the optimum point gives lower power reference for the first 4 wind turbines in the WFM-Const-Ω than WFM-Const-Ω and WFM-Constλ, however the power being produced by the rest of the wind turbines are bigger which gives and overall optimum value which is higher than the power of the other two wind farms. The first row of table I gives the results of the three optimizations. We can compare the optimization results with the case where we give a constant power reference to individual wind turbines (e.g. Ri = 5M W, i = 1, . . . , 10). Figure 8 shows the results for operating the wind turbines at their rated power, in other words setting the power reference to be 5M W . We can see that in this scenario the wind speed drops below the cut-in wind speed for wind turbines 7, 8, 9 and 10. The produced power values are given in row 2 of table I and the value is the same for the three wind farm models. Figure 9 shows the results for operating the wind turbines at power reference if 2.5M W . In this scenario almost all of the wind turbines are producing power and in contrast to the previous scenario we see that the produced powers are different for the three wind farm models. The generated power values are given in table I. In order to compare the produced power of the wind farms in different simulation cases, we did the calculations for three more scenarios in which we used the power reference values obtained for one wind farm model on the other two models. Figures 11, 12 and 13 show the results of the last three scenarios which correspond to the last three lines of table I. We see that in all the three scenarios the power produced by the wind farm model WFM-Const-Ω is more than the

1

10 8 6

-8

-6

-4

-2 0 Pitch [degrees]

2

4

6

Fig. 10: A contour curve for Cp = 0.4 and contour curves of the Ct for 0.4 ≤ Ct ≤ 0.9

1713

4



4

3

2

1

0

1

2

3

4

5 7 6 Wind turbines

8

9

3

2

1

0

10

Fig. 11: The generated power of the three wind farm models using the power reference values obtained for the WFMConst-λ model, individual wind turbine powers of the three wind farm models, WFM-Const-Ω is Blue, WFM-Max-Ω is green and WFM-Const-λ is red

1

2

3

4

5 7 6 Wind turbines

8

9

10

Fig. 13: The generated power of the three wind farm models using the power reference values obtained for the WFMMax-Ω model, individual wind turbine powers of the three wind farm models, WFM-Const-Ω is Blue, WFM-Max-Ω is green and WFM-Const-λ is red


3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

1

2

3

4

7 5 6 Wind turbines

8

9

10

Fig. 12: The generated power of the three wind farm models using the power reference values obtained for the WFMConst-Ω model, individual wind turbine powers of the three wind farm models, WFM-Const-Ω is Blue, WFM-Max-Ω is green and WFM-Const-λ is red

we compare figure 1 and 10 we can see that the Const-Ω strategy gives an operating point that has a smaller Ct value compared to the other two strategies. Therefore because of less wake deficit, the wind farm model using this control strategy gives more power in all the simulation scenarios than the other two wind farm models. V. C ONCLUSION In this paper we setup wind farm models based on individual wind turbines with three different control strategies for down-regulating. We used the wind farm model and optimization procedures to compare the maximum power that can be generated by the wind farms. It is shown that for all the wind speed values, the Const-Ω control strategy gives more power than the other two strategies. In this paper the focus is only on power production and we have not taken the dynamic loads on the turbine structures into account. R EFERENCES [1] Kathryn E. Johnson and Naveen Thomas. Wind farm control: addressing the aerodynamic interaction among wind turbines. Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pages 2104–2109, 2009. [2] M. Steinbuch, W.W. de Boer, O.H. Bosgra, S.A.W.M. Peters, and J. Ploeg. Optimal control of wind power plants. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 27(13):237–246, January 1988.

[3] Maryam Soleimanzadeh, Rafael Wisniewski, and Kathryn Johnson. A distributed optimization framework for wind farms. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics, 123(Part A):88, 2013. [4] P. M O Gebraad and J. W. van Wingerden. Maximum power-point tracking control for wind farms. Wind Energy,, 18(3):429–447, 2014. [5] Benjamin Biegel, Daria Madjidian, Vedrana Spudic, Anders Rantzer, and Jakob Stoustrup. Distributed low-complexity controller for wind power plant in derated operation. In Proceedings of the Ieee International Conference on Control Applications, Proc. Ieee Int. Conf. Control App, pages 146–151. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., 2013. [6] Daria Madjidian, Karl Martensson, and Anders Rantzer. A distributed power coordination scheme for fatigue load reduction in wind farms. Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pages 5219–5224, 2011. [7] P. M. O. Gebraad, F. W. Teeuwisse, J. W. van Wingerden, P. A. Fleming, S. D. Ruben, J. R. Marden, and L. Y. Pao. A data-driven model for wind plant power optimization by yaw control. Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pages 3128–3134, 2014. [8] Fernando D. Bianchi, Hernan De Battista, and Ricardo J. Mantz. Wind Turbine Control Systems: Principles, Modelling and Gain Scheduling Design. Springer, 2006. [9] J. Aho, L. Pao, P. Fleming, and A. Buckspan. An active power control system for wind turbines capable of primary and secondary frequency control for supporting grid reliability. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, pages 6792–6804, 2013. [10] Mahmood Mirzaei, Mohsen Soltani, Niels Kjølstad Poulsen, and Hans Henrik Niemann. Model based active power control of a wind turbine. In American Control Conference, Portland, OR, the United States, 2014. [11] J. Jonkman, S. Butterfield, W. Musial, and G. Scott. Definition of a 5MW reference wind turbine for offshore system development. Technical report, National Renewable Energy Laboratory,, 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000, 2009. [12] Mahmood Mirzaei, Niels Kjølstad Poulsen, and Hans Henrik Niemann. Robust model predictive control of a wind turbine. In American Control Conference, Montral, Canada, 2012. [13] A. Crespo and J. Hernandez. Turbulence characteristics in windturbine wakes. Journal of wind engineering and industrial aerodynamics, 61(1):71–85, 1996. [14] R.J. Barthelmie, L. Folkerts, Gunner Chr. Larsen, K. Rados, S.C. Pryor, Sten Trons Frandsen, B. Lange, and G. Schepers. Comparison of wake model simulations with offshore wind turbine wake profiles measured by sodar. J. Atmos. Ocean. Technol, 23(7):888–901, 2006. [15] K. Rados, G. Larsen, R. Barthelmie, W. Schlez, B. Lange, G. Schepers, T. Hegberg, and M. Magnisson. Comparison of wake models with data for offshore windfarms. Wind Engineering, Wind Eng, 25(5):271–280, 2001. [16] N.O. Jensen. A note on wind generator interaction. Technical report, Risø, 1983. – pp.

1714