-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 466
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CONING ANGLE #2095
Comments
Dear @jjonkman, |
Dear @ILDENIEL, I'm not fully sure. Are the cases without shear? @ebranlard has been making several improvements to the BEM implementation of AeroDyn to better support cone, blade deflection, skew, and shear. The following pull requests are likely of interest to you, especially #1509: Currently, the various new BEM options are a bit "hidden", but these will become more user-accessible with #1909. Best regards, |
Dear @jjonkman, |
Is it possible that my results are not 100% correct because of this bug? |
Dear @ILDENIEL, I wouldn't call AeroDyn before @ebranlard's recent improvements "buggy", but @ebranlard's changes should improve the accuracy of the aerodynamic predictions for cases with cone, blade curvature, skew, and shear. I'm not sure I understand your question about "citing"? Best regards, |
Dear @jjonkman Best regards, |
Dear @ILDENIEL, I don't have specific guidance for mentioning NREL (or my) support, but listing that support in the Acknowledgements section of a publication is appreciated. And you can always add citations or footnotes that direct link to websites such as this OpenFAST repository. Best regards, |
Dear @jjonkman, |
Hi all,
I have a question regarding the power of a turbine modeled starting from the 5MW Baseline (OpenFAST v3.5.2) but:
A turbine with coning = 2.5° produces an average aerodynamic power higher than the case with coming = 0.
What could be the reasons for this behaviour?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: