Vibration Analysis of the

Windflow Turbine Gearbox

Nigel Leigh
Design Engineering Manager
Commtest Instruments Ltd

Commtest Instruments Ltd

28b Moorhouse Avenue
Christchurch
New Zealand
Introduction
Windflow Technology have designed, built and installed a prototype half-megawatt
wind turbine on the Port Hills of Christchurch, New Zealand. They have planned a
104 turbine windfarm near Palmerston North.
This paper describes:

• the novel gearbox design, being 4-stage epicyclic, with flexible planet pins to
aid load sharing, and a hydraulic torque limiter to reduce peak loads on the
machinery.

• vibration monitoring, analysis of source of audible noise, and the resulting

gearbox design modifications to run quieter.

• online monitoring after re-installation, including remote communications and a

basic level of shutdown protection.

Design Innovations
The Windflow turbine design has been optimized for New Zealand conditions. These
conditions demand tolerance for strong gusty winds, and yet relative light weight for
ease of installation in our steep remote hills.

Self Teetering Rotor

Wind is not steady, and gusts do not tend to
occur uniformly over the entire rotor disk. This
can cause excessive torsional loads on the
turbine, for example if a strong gust occurs on
the upper half of the rotor only.
In the Windflow design the two rotor blades are
rigidly attached to each other at the hub, but
are allowed some play in the connection from
the hub to the main shaft. This allows the ‘disk’
formed by the spinning blades to deflect in the
event of asymmetric gusts.
More clever still, this deflection causes the
pitch of each blade to adjust slightly, somewhat
counteracting the gust.

Page 1 of 17
Epicyclic Gearbox with Load Sharing Planet Pins
The gearbox must convert 48 rpm at the rotor blades into 1500 rpm for the
synchronous generator. It must also be as light and compact as possible. This was
achieved using a 4 stage design, with three of the stages using epicyclic (planetary)
gears. These were chosen for their high torque rating in a compact housing.
The highest torque acts on the slow turning first stage. By using more planets, the
load can be shared by more gear teeth simultaneously. Four planets is the common
upper limit, as above that number it becomes very difficult to machine the gear with
such precision that all share equal load.
Windflow overcame this by using flexible planet pins, thus allowing them to use eight
planets in the first stage; but these are not simple straight pins, as that would cause
twisting of the planet’s rotation axis, thus distorting the gear mesh. Instead they use a
double cantilevered design which allows for a massive 0.5 mm of axial deflection,
without twisting.

Page 2 of 17
Torque Limiting Gearbox (Patented)
To achieve Windflow’s aim of a light efficient structure, they use the concept of
shedding excess load rather than resisting it. The self teetering rotor is one example
of this; the Torque Limiting Gearbox is an even better one.
The entire drive train is designed to withstand the torques created when generating
500 KW. In stronger winds the blades are simply pitched to reduce the torque they
produce. The problem is wind gusts, which can develop massive peak loads. The
graph below shows how the power output is limited to 500 KW, even through strong
wind gusts.

Torque Limiting Time Series - 22 March 2004

30 600
Wind Speed Real Power TL Pressure Rotor Speed

25 500

Rotor Speed (rpm)

TL Pressure (bar)
Wind Speed (m/s)

Real Power (kW)

20 400

15 300

10 200

5 100

0 0
0 60 120 180 240 300 360
Time (s)

The TLG is a simple concept: attach a hydraulic pump on the side of the gearbox,
which pumps against a closed relief valve. The pump is normally stationary and the
gearbox has a fixed ratio from input to output, but during sudden gusts the increased
torque causes the pump pressure to exceed the relief valve, and mechanical slip
results, dissipating the torque. The rotor over-speeds slightly, causing the automatic
pitch control mechanism to readjust.

Page 3 of 17
 In practice this is complex, requiring the forth stage epicyclic to have all three
components in motion (ring, sun and planet carrier). The diagram below is further
complicated by the addition of the external disk brake for emergency shutdowns.

Vibration Analysis and Noise Reduction

Commtest’s Initial Involvement
We were interested in learning about the issues involved in condition monitoring on
wind turbines, and had contacted Windflow about a mutual field trial arrangement.
The first opportunity occurred during their pre-commissioning testing of the gearbox +
generator assembly in a factory in Christchurch. The assembly was being driven by a
test rig motor and gearbox as shown.

Page 4 of 17
They were seeing very high vibration levels at the running speed of the generator.
They knew that the test rig motor was running at a similar speed, but could not
determine which was the actual culprit.
By taking a few high resolution spectra it was clear that the 1480 rpm test rig motor
was totally dominating the vibration from the generator at 1500 rpm. Windflow were
very happy!

WINDMILL - GEN DE - Horizontal - Vel Freq 100 Hz

7/04/2003 2:54:16 p.m.
Point Note (8/04/2003 9:43:57 a.m.)
GEN DE = Generator, Drive End
4.5 Cursor A: 1480.275 CPM 4.293 mm/s
O/All 3.136 mm/s rms
4

3.5

3
mm/s 0-pk

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
1,300 1,350 1,400 1,450 1,500 1,550 1,600 1,650 1,700
CPM
7/04/2003 2:54:16 p.m. O/All 3.136 mm/s rms <set RPM> <add note>

Page 5 of 17
GMF of Epicyclic Gearboxes
After that initial success things quickly got trickier. Three epicyclic stages meant a lot
of shafts, gear meshes and bearings, all in one compact housing. The spectra were
very confusing!

I created a spreadsheet to calculate all the various fault frequencies (planet pass,
carrier, sun, ring, and all the usual bearing ones at whatever speed they happen to
be turning).

Page 6 of 17
Of particular concern was the huge peak at 311 Hz, which was frustratingly close, but
not equal, to the second stage GMF of 313.36 Hz. No number of recalculations could
bring the two together!
I suspected a modulation effect, caused by the planets passing the location of the
accelerometer. The “Frequency based Waveform Analysis” function in the Ascent
software enabled me to look at the waveform in a narrow band around 311 Hz.

This showed clear modulation! So the actual peak must be just a sideband of the
GMF. The difference between the two cursors on the waveform shows modulation at
about 10 Hz, which does correspond with the Planet Pass frequency (Carrier fc of
2.51 Hz x 4 planets).
BUT the difference between 311 Hz and the actual GMF is about 2.5 Hz, not the 10
Hz…. so that’s not quite it…
Later in the proceedings Windflow engaged the services of many acoustics and
vibration experts. One of whom was Lan Le-Ngoc from IRL. He uncovered a paper
by J. Mc Names titled “Fourier Series Analysis of Epicyclic Gearbox Vibration”. The
complex math he used predicted that the phased signal from each of the planets
would cancel out the others, except at multiples of the number of planets. As an
example he used a gearbox with 119 teeth on the Ring gear, for which you would
expect to measure a GMF at 119 times the Carrier rpm. He predicted that the
vibrations would cancel at all frequencies except for multiples of the 8 planets, ie at
112, 120, 128 (x Carrier rpm).

Page 7 of 17
Measurements on a Cobra AH-1S helicopter gearbox proved this to be exactly the
case. The GMF appeared at 120 cpr, not 119!

The Windflow gearbox second stage has 4 planets and 125 ring teeth. So the closest
#planet multiple is 124 cpr, and:
124/125 * 313.5 Hz (actual GMF) = 311 Hz (observed GMF). Eureka!
So we were now sure that large vibration peak was coming from the gearbox second
stage. But why was it so much larger than that from the (almost identical) first stage?
Note that the first stage has the same number of ring teeth (125) as the second
stage, but has 8 planets instead of 4, so the closest #planet multiples are a lot further
away from the actual GMF, at 120 and 128…

Page 8 of 17
Windflow were already behind schedule for installing the turbine on the hill, so I
concluded my (unofficial) testing report with the disclaimer:
“Using ISO 10816-3 as a reference (rpm<=600, rigid, group2), most locations have
‘Acceptable’ overall vibration levels in the 10-1000 Hz band…
“However I suggest that the 311 Hz frequency region should be closely monitored
when the Wind turbine is operating. It seems significant that by comparison the 1st
stage GMF at 102 Hz is almost non-existent in the spectra.”

The Noise Problem

Soon after the installation was complete, the newspaper headlines began…
“Noisy turbine annoys neighbours”…
“Turbine noise problem”
Sound level readings were being taken anyway to check for Resource Consent
compliance. They showed acceptably low levels, apart from the 1/3 octave band
between bout 250 Hz and 400 Hz.
But what exactly was the source of the noise?

LEQ Sound Pressure Level on Julie Riley's Property 8-10-03

35

30
LEQ Sound Pressure Level

Note: At frequencies where no data

points are shown, the measured
25
sound pressure level was below 11
dBA.
20

15

10

5 21:50 Idle (L95 = 23.4 dBA) 22:10 Generating (L95 = 29.8 dBA) 22:20 Generating L95 = 31.2 dBA)
22:30 Generating (L95 = 28.2 dBA) 22:40 Idle (L95 = 23.4 dBA)
0
16 25 40 63 100 160 250 400 630 1k 1.6k 2.5k 4k 6.3k 10k

1/3 Octave Band Centre Frequency (Hz)

Page 9 of 17
$35 Microphone to the Rescue!
I headed to a local electronics store and invested vast sums of money on a
microphone and a couple of adapters to convert to a BNC connection. This idea had
come from a previous VANZ presentation by Matt Fallow of ARS.

It worked incredibly well! Being a passive microphone its output was rather low so I
entered a low sensitivity of 10 mV/g into the instrument.
The resulting spectra had units of gs - rather strange for a sound recording, but
perfectly functional for our purpose of identifying the exact frequencies.
0.14
O/All 0.377 g rms

0.12
311 Hz

0.1

0.08 375 Hz
g rms

0.06

985 Hz

0.04

100 Hz

0.02

0 200 400 600 800 1,000

Hz
Tower base Horizontal Acc Freq 3000 Hz 14/07/2003 1:27:28 p.m. O/All 0.377
Tower base Horizontal Acc Freq 2000 Hz 14/07/2003 1:23:43 p.m. O/All 0.25 g
SOUND 30M from base Not specified Acc Freq 2000 Hz 14/07/2003 1:15:07 p.m. O/All 0.035
SOUND 5M from base Horizontal Acc Freq 2000 Hz 14/07/2003 3:55:37 p.m. O/All 0.046
SOUND 5M from base Horizontal Acc Freq 2000 Hz 14/07/2003 1:17:00 p.m. O/All 0.006
SOUND inside base Horizontal Acc Freq 2000 Hz 14/07/2003 1:22:05 p.m. O/All 0.269
SOUND inside base Horizontal Acc Freq 2000 Hz 14/07/2003 3:54:27 p.m. O/All 0.127

As suspected, the main culprit was the old 311 Hz 2nd stage GMF…

Page 10 of 17
Noise Transmission Path
Windflow had two choices: eliminate the noise at source, or prevent it from getting
out of the turbine. Clearly the former was preferable, but a gearbox re-design would
be very costly so they attempted the latter by trying to determine the noise
transmission path.
This involved extensive analysis of the mode shapes of the palet, tower, blades etc.
Many resonant frequencies near 311 Hz were identified in each component and
attempts were made to damp the vibration by attaching thick rubber mats or injecting
foam. Results indicated the damping generally worked on the component it was
attached to, but still the external noise level did not reduce.
Lan of IRL found the actual transmission path when he performed resonance bump
tests on the main Low Speed Shaft (between hub and generator).

As Windflow described it, their turbine was acting as a “tuned music system”:
Stage 2 gear mesh was the CD player
a low speed shaft resonance was the amplifier
the blades were acting as speakers.
But the “music” was a very boring single note, E-flat, 311 Hz!

Page 11 of 17
The Final Noise Solution
The gearbox was removed and returned to the manufacturers in Auckland for
evaluation of several refit options. The options were designed after an even more in-
depth analysis of the behavior of epicyclic gearboxes, including the distinction
between rotational and translational modes of excitation.

After each refit the gearbox was tested on their new full-power test rig, with detailed
before and after vibration readings taken. By this stage Windflow had purchased their
own vb instrument and were becoming proficient VA analysts themselves!
The final solution is…. well… confidential, as it was so successful that Windflow
have filed a patent to cover it!
See for yourself in the before and after spectra:
FFT 1-30 - FFT 1 - Not specified - Acc Freq 1200 Hz
30/04/2004 2:14:30 p.m.
0.7
O/All 0.991 g rms

0.6

0.5

0.4
g rms

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,20
Hz
30/04/2004 2:14:30 p.m. O/All 0.991 g rms <set RPM>

Page 12 of 17
 FFT 1-30 - FFT 1 - Not specified - Acc Freq 1200 Hz
7/07/2004 5:04:47 p.m.
0.7
O/All 0.468 g rms

0.6

0.5

0.4
g rms

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,20
Hz
7/07/2004 5:04:47 p.m. O/All 0.468 g rms <set RPM>

Online Condition Monitoring

During all of the above, Windflow had several bearing failures in the gearbox. These
were mainly around the complex concentric shafts of the torque limiting 4th stage.
Meanwhile we at Commtest had developed an online monitoring system, the
vbOnline™. We agreed on a mutually beneficial field trial partnership, in which they
would gain surveillance and some measure of shutdown protection, and we would
gain insight into the challenges of online monitoring on wind turbines.
The turbine is at a remote site on the Port Hills, lacking even a telephone land line.
We decided to install a PC on-site to control the frequent protection recordings, and
use a wireless data modem to allow access from the head office.

The on-site PC was intended to be a simple, low cost solid state PC with no moving
parts. These are sold under names like WinTerm and ThinClient. They use flash
memory, have processors around 1 GHz and cost only US $500. This PC runs the
OnlineManager program which schedules the recordings on the vbOnline module,
stores them in a database, checks alarms and controls the module’s output relays.

Page 13 of 17
We established a machine structure in which daily gearbox surveillance recordings
were kept separate from the very frequent protection recordings.

For the protection readings, alarm checking was complicated by several factors:

• the significant changes in vibration levels at different power output levels

• the gusty nature of the wind, causing rapid power level changes

• the desire to have a “second opinion” reading, before causing a turbine

shutdown
We addressed these issues by reading the generators’ power output level from the
turbine’s PLC control system. We established Recording Criteria to separate the
recordings into three generation power levels, each with their own alarm thresholds.
Recording Intervals alternated the Check1 and Check2 recordings, each of which
controlled an output relay.

Page 14 of 17
 We wired the two relays in series so both would need to be activated to cause a
shutdown.

This solution proved to be adequate, but is rather complex and the separation into
the generation power levels is not perfect. Development is underway to streamline
this, which should yield benefits not just for wind turbines but for all users of variable
speed machinery.

2006 Update
Those developments are nearing completion. We now have:
Onboard Criteria – Recordings can be configured to only be taken when the speed
and/or another parameter (in this case generation power) are stable and within
specified ranges.
QuickScan Mode – Rapidly scans all channels checking for excessive overall
vibration levels, in order to quickly detect serious mechanical failures. The user-
configurable responses range from e-mails and sms messages to relay activation.
Normal vibration analysis recordings are automatically interleaved with QuickScans,
at their scheduled times. In this Wind Turbine application the option of applying RPM
Criteria to the QuickScan is useful to ensure the readings are only taken when the
wind is blowing!
Robustness Enhancements – These cover a wide range of issues, from the ability to
detect sensor faults and warn users of communication failures, to a suite of Relay
enhancements including configurable time delays and the provision of manual
override.
Stay tuned: the results from applying these techniques to monitoring the Windflow
turbine will be covered in a future paper…

Page 15 of 17
Acknowledgements
Acknowledgement of significant contribution to the content of this paper:
Warwick Payne, Windflow Technology.
Geoff Henderson, Windflow Technology.
Lan Le-Ngoc, Industrial Research Limited.
James McNames, Portland State University.
Nigel Leigh, MSc (Physics, Hons) is a design engineering manager for Commtest
Instruments Ltd. He has seven years’ experience in the design and manufacture of
vibration analysis equipment, both portble and online systems. He has served as
committee member of the Vibration Association of New Zealand (VANZ) for the past
four years.

Page 16 of 17