DOE OSTI2025
Wind-farm control strategies aim to increase the efficiency, and therefore lower the levelized cost of energy, of wind farms. This is done by using turbine settings such as the yaw angle, blade pitch angles, or generator torque to manipulate the wake that negatively affects downstream turbines in the farm. Two inherently different wind-farm control methods have been identified in the literature: wake steering (WS) and active wake mixing (AWM). As one of two companion papers focused on understanding practical aspects of these two wind-farm control strategies using large-eddy simulation (LES), we below analyze the wake quantities of interest for a single wind turbine performing WS and AWM, while the companion article (Frederik et al., 2025) focuses on turbine quantities of interest including power and structural loads for the same computational setup and also includes two-turbine arrays with full and partial wake overlap. The simulations, which are based in the LES solver AMR-Wind, are tailored to have inflow conditions representative of measurements from a site off the East Coast of the US, including with strong veer and low turbulence. The turbine, which is modeled in OpenFAST and coupled to the LES, is the IEA 15 MW, an open-source offshore design. After presenting an overview of the wake recovery for the different wake-control cases, the analysis probes the fluid-dynamic causes for the different performance of the arrays reported in the companion article by examining control volumes around the wakes and the budget of the mean-flow kinetic energy (MKE) within these volumes. In the high veer environment considered, the MKE recovery is dominated by mean convection, and this is shown to especially benefit the WS strategy when a neighboring turbine is directly downstream: there is ≈65 % more available power for a downstream turbine than in the baseline case, and this power is gained primarily through mean convection on the left-tip and top-tip faces of the control volume. However, the case with imperfect knowledge of the exact wind direction favors the pulse-type AWM strategy, largely because of ≈9 % increased turbulent entrainment from aloft versus the baseline that could be related to an apparent resistance to skewing in the pulsed wake. The general reduced effectiveness of helix-type and other individual-pitch-based AWM strategies for inflow with high veer and low turbulence as reported in the companion paper is due, in part, to low magnitudes of phase-averaged turbulent entrainment. Two main findings of this study are thus that veer has a significant impact on the effectiveness of different wake-control strategies and that pulse-type AWM may be a useful strategy when the objective is power maximization in realistic, offshore flow environments with imperfect knowledge of the exact wake overlap position on the downstream turbine.