J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn.

107108 (2012) 94105

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Wind Engineering

and Industrial Aerodynamics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jweia

Effects of near-wall grid spacing on SST-K-o model using

NREL Phase VI horizontal axis wind turbine
Mohammad Moshfeghi, Ya Jun Song, Yong Hui Xie n
School Energy and Power Engineering Xian Jiaotong University, Xian, Shaanxi, 710049, PR China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Investigation of the effects of near-wall grid spacing for the SST-K-o model and study of the
Received 14 October 2011 aerodynamic behavior of a horizontal axis wind turbine are the two goals of this paper. The NREL
Received in revised form Phase VI is used as the aerodynamic model. Eight different cases are investigated for the near wall grid
4 March 2012
spacing study. Furthermore, one case is studied in both the SST-K-o and the Langtry-Menter
Accepted 31 March 2012
Available online 18 April 2012
transitional models. For all cases the total number of nodes are fewer than 5000,000. Thrust forces,
ow patterns and pressure coefcients are compared at different wind speeds. The thrust values of the
Keywords: SST-K-o are not in a good agreement with the test results. The streamlines show that the inboard
Near-wall grid spacing section of the blade has a severe complex 3D ow which separates at low velocities; the mid-span
SST-K-o turbulence model
section stays attached for higher velocities and the outboard part has 2D-like behavior and separates as
Y-plus
the last part. Also, for areas with complex separation, reattachment and sever spanwise ow (e.g., at the
Streamwise grid spacing
NREL Phase VI inboard section), the SST-K-o mispredicts the pressure values. Generally, the SST-K-o over predicts the
separation by mispredicting the separation point. Besides, it is observed that GammaTheta transitional
model behaves differently from the SST-K-o, especially at the inner part and the results are closer to
the test results.
& 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Laboratory) Phase VI is used. A HAWT is chosen due to recent

CFD simulation is becoming one of the most important parts of
industrial projects. Almost all industrial cases that exist in our
world have, somehow, a connection with uid dynamics. For the
analysis of moving objects (or ow around objects) in CFD codes,
there exist some hypothetical models for turbulent simulation.
The RANS-based turbulence models are very popular ones. These
models, however, are general purpose models and lack accuracy
in prediction of separation point, separated ow properties and
ow reattachment. These inaccuracies are unpreventable for all
the RANS-based models and have different levels of importance in
different cases. Based on this fact, to achieve some relatively
appropriate criteria for using the RANS-based models there exists
only one possible way via sensitivity analysis. The rst goal for
this paper is the investigation of the effects of grid spacing in the
chordwise and normal-to-surface directions in SST-K-o.
In addition, the second goal of this paper is the study of
aerodynamic behavior of a HAWT (horizontal axis wind turbine).
Therefore, the well-known NREL (National Renewable Energy
n
Corresponding author. Tel./fax: 86 29 82664443.
E-mail addresses: Mohammad.Moshfeghi@Gmail.com (M. Moshfeghi),
syajun1987@163.com (Y.J. Song), yhxie@mail.xjtu.edu.cn (Y.H. Xie).
interests in green energy resources. For example just in the U.S.,
the production of 20% of energy needs from wind by the year
2030 is a government plan (The U.S. Department of Energy, 2008).
With these new interests, very important issues become improve-
ments in our knowledge about these energy-capturing machines
and consequently designing more effective wind turbines. Thus,
in the research centers two important and very close aims are
followed; commercial and/or scientic. Among all research cen-
ters, some are very well-known for scholars including WERC, ECN,
Ris DTU and NREL. Also, recently MEXICO has started to release
some technical reports about the MEXICO project (Snel et al.,
2007). However, for more than a decade the most comprehensive
technical and scientic reports are about different phases of NREL
wind turbines, especially Phase VI (NREL Homepage). Very
exhaustive information about NREL Phase VI test can be found
in ofcial report by Jonkman (2003).
In the past decade, many scholars investigated CFD codes and
used test results of a HAWT for the validation of their works.
Many others directly focused on the aerodynamic behavior of
HAWTs. Menter et al. (2003) described the SST formulation as
well as a number of model enhancements which covered mod-
ied near wall treatment of the equations. Langtry and Menter
(2005) and Langtry et al. (2006) proposed a correlation-based
transitional model which was built based on local variables. The

0167-6105/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2012.03.032
 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105
transitional model interacted with the SST model, and the S809
airfoil and NREL Phase VI blade were used to validate the model.
Very similar work was done by Srensen (2008) to determine the
two empirical relations in correlation-based transitional model
and to implement the model to the EllipSys code. Several aero-
dynamic cases, including NREL Phase VI, were used to verify the
model. Zahle et al. (2009) employed a 3D NavierStokes simula-
tion of unsteady ow using the overset grid method together with
EllipSys solver for incompressible ow. The research was done for
the downwind NREL Phase VI to capture the unsteady effects of
the tower on the blade performance. Potsdam and Mavriplis
(2009) used an unstructured mesh NavierStokes CFD solver
and studied a large range of surface mesh densities and topologies
for the same HAWT. In their work, the effects of different
unstructured meshes versus structured ones together with dif-
ferent grid spacings were investigated. Lynch (2011) developed a
range of unstructured grid CFD techniques for predicting wind
turbine loads. Le Pape and Gleize (2006) applied a Low Mach
Precondition (LMP) technique to the ONERA compressible Navier
Stokes solver and showed that the technique was useful to
improve the quality of numerical results for low velocities for
NREL Phase VI. Duque et al. (2003) used a lifting line code
(CAMRAD II) for both axial and yawed operating conditions, and
a Reynolds-averaged NavierStokes code (OVERFLOW-D) for only
axial conditions of the NREL Phase VI rotor. A detailed study for
near-wake and far-wake zones for several wind turbines, includ-
ing NREL Phase VI, was presented by Vermeer et al. (2003). Their
work contained different ow visualizations, test data and also
analytical results. Later, Carcangiu (2008) surveyed the wake and
the blade tip effects on LM19.1 and NREL Phase VI rotors.
Gonzalez and Munduate (2008) investigated the aerodynamics
and separation of 2D and also 3D parked and rotating 2-bladed
upwind NREL phase VI. Their objective was to clarify the nature of
the ow eld and the type of stall behavior for the S809 airfoil,
parked and rotating blades. In the same year, Chao and Van Dam
(2007) studied the effects of a modied NREL Phase VI rotor using
the OVERFLOW solver. In their rotor, the inboard portion of the
blade was modeled with a thickened, blunt trailing edge version
of the S809. Moreover, very recently, Jia (2011) studied different
turbulence models, including the SST-K-o, on the NREL Phase VI.
In his work the blade was rounded at the T.E. Besides, Rajvanshi
et al. (2011) studied a CFD simulation employing the SST-K-o and
the Langtry-Menter transition models by using a high perfor-
mance supercomputer. Their model is one blade of NREL Phase VI
and contains about 39 million nodes.
In addition to wind turbines, there are many other valuable
attempts in other elds of wind energy. For example, Zhang
(2010) studied the laminarturbulent transition for attached
and separated ows to shed light on the utter and high cycle
fatigue failure problems in the aircrafts gas turbine engines. Also,
the effects of different transition onset models were investigated
by Zhang. Moreover, Selvam (2010a, 2010b) comprehensively
addressed building and bridge aerodynamics using DES turbu-
lence model. He investigated the importance of grid indepen-
dence on pressure coefcients using 2D ow around the Great
Belt East Bridge cross section; and the computed results were
compared with wind tunnel measurements. Moreover, for the
Texas Tech University building the velocity vector, mean and peak
pressures are compared.
Following the above investigations about sensitivity analysis
for different parameters, in the current paper the near wall grid
spacing in different cases are investigated. All cases have between
3.6 and 5 million nodes. Menters SST-K-o turbulence model
(Menter, 1993, 1994) is used and different wind speeds are
studied. The runs are done by Ansys-CFX 11 and results are
compared with test results. All the results presented in the
95
current paper are simulated by a desktop computer with 8 GB
RAM and 4n2.4 GHz CPU. Denitely, with the use of a super-
computer and subsequently using more computational capabil-
ities, cases with more complex turbulence models (e.g., DES and
LES), higher number of nodes and higher mesh densities can be
investigated. However, one important issue is that those super-
computers are not available for most of the scholars and in most
of research centers. At least for some early steps, desktop
computers are still being used widely. Therefore, having true
knowledge and quantitative information about the least mesh
requisites, and overall accuracy of results are very important for
the researchers.
2. Geometry of the model
In the present work, the extended version of NREL Phase VI
wind turbine is modeled by Solidworks 2007. The original model
is a two-bladed, zero cone angle, 20-kW HAWT with diameter of
10 m. The extended version, however, has a 10% increase in
diameter. The turbine was exhaustively tested during the
Unsteady Aerodynamic Experiment program (UAE) in the
NASAAmes wind tunnel tests and was well-documented by
Jonkman (2003) and Gigue re and Selig (1999). The S809 airfoil
is used in the turbine which has 21% thickness with a sharp
trailing edged and is designed specically for HAWTs. Besides its
special design, S809 is widely tested in different tests and in
different Reynolds numbers at Ohio State University, Delft Uni-
versity of technology and Colorado State University (Jonkman,
2003).
As reported by some authors, for the sake of simplicity, a blunt
airfoil is used instead of the original one. To prevent the
discrepancies which are expected and reported for a blunt edge
S809 airfoil (Chao and Van Dam, 2007), in the present work the
original sharp-edged airfoil is modeled. This can cause advantages
for the present modeling, especially in the regions near trailing
edge (T.E.) with high adverse pressure gradient to be simulated
more exactly. Nevertheless, in the present model, there exist two
geometrical simplications. The geometry of the transition part
form circular stem to S809 airfoil is slightly different from the
UAE test model. In the UAE model, the cylindrical stem ends at
883 mm from the axis of rotation while in the present model this
location is 660 mm. Also, at the tip leading edge the original
model is rounded in a blunt shape (r  90 mm), while in the
present work the tip is cut with a plane normal to the blade pitch
axis (Fig. 1) and therefore it has the exact S809 airfoil. These two
simplications are done for the sake of increase in the mesh
quality in these areas. The detailed information about the geo-
metry of the original model is available in Gigue re and Selig
(1999). The coordinate system of this work is shown in Fig. 2. The
Fig. 1. Places of simplications on the blade.
96 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105

X axis is parallel to the chord of the airfoil at Z 3.772 m (at which
the blade twist angle is zero); the Y axis is longitudinal axis of the
model and the Z axis lies along the blades pitch axis. It is
noteworthy to mention here that the blade is linearly tapered
from root (Croot 737 mm) to tip (Ctip 305 mm).
safety factor of about 1.6 is applied to the this value to ensure the
satisfaction of the y requirements and to place more nodes
inside the boundary layer. Fig. 5 shows the maximum of y for all

3. Domain size and grid information

The computational domain is composed of two cylindrical sub-

domains; one outer stationary domain with low mesh density and
one inner rotary domain with high mesh density. The whole
domain is shown in Fig. 3(a) and (b). The meshing process is done
by Ansys ICEM 11. The O-grid mesh is used to create the grids and
then the grids are converted to the unstructured form, before they
are imported to CFX. Fig. 4 shows the general conguration of the
mesh around the blade tip section.
For different cases in the present work, different rst node
spacing values are used which result to 7 to 21 nodes inside the
boundary layer (B.L.). Table 1 presents a comparison between
different cases. It should be mentioned here that the calculation
of the boundary layer thickness is done based on at plate
equations which are available in many classical aerodynamic
textbooks. Besides, calculation of the rst grid spacing is done
in different radial positions, r/R, for different wind speeds ranging
from 7 m/s to 15 m/s. Based on the calculations, not shown here,
for each velocity the smallest value of the rst grid spacing always
happens at the tip. Finally, the smallest value of all calculations is
applied for the whole blade. According to calculations, this value
is about 8.3 mm. During the meshing process, in some cases the
Fig. 4. Typical mesh congurations around the tip airfoil.

Table 1
Grid properties of different cases.

ID(a) OD(b) First node Exp. Chord-wise Nodes

nodesn1000 nodesn1000 n1e-6 ratio nodes in B.L

Case 1 3140 986 5 1.26 37 21

Case 2 3480 986 5 1.26 52 21
Case 3 3140 986 8.3 1.33 37 15
Cases 4, 5 2700 986 5 1.26 50 21
Case 6 4080 986 5 1.26 81 21
Case 7 2940 986 24 (n ) 50 7
Case 8 3000 986 5 2.35 50 7
Case 9 2700 986 5 1.5 50 14

a
ID: Inner Domain.
b
OD: Outer Domain.
n
Manual node positioning is used which does not have the expansion ratio
Fig. 2. The coordinate system of the model. option.

Fig. 3. (a) Dimension of the domains [m]. (b) Two sub-domains conguration.
 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105
Fig. 5. Y-plus distribution on the blades surface.
cases. The values inside the parentheses are percentages of
number of nodes with y value smaller than one. As it can be
seen in Fig. 5, for all cases, except Case 7, between 79% and 87% of
total nodes on the blade surface have the y value smaller than
one. However, in Case 7 nodes are positioned manually in an
irregular arrangement to create a model with fewer nodes within
the B.L. For this case, intentionally, only 24% of the nodes on the
blade surface satisfy the condition of y o1.
It must be noted here that the grids in Cases 4 and 5 are
exactly the same and the only difference is that Case 5 is used for
the GammaTheta transitional simulation. All these cases
together, give us more possible options to investigate the near-
wall grid spacing inuences.
As explained by Leishman (2006), the near-wake zone is a very
inuential zone for the rotary wings. Therefore, in this paper, the
meshing blocks are designed in such a way to keep the grid
density in this near-wake zone as unaffected as possible when the
total number of nodes is changed. This near-wake zone is
considered to expand from one average chord length (0.5 m)
upstream of the rotor plane to one average chord length (0.5 m)
downstream the rotor plane in the axial direction. One advantage
of this technique is that because the far-wake zones compared to
the near-wake zones have larger axial dimensions, the change in
the number of nodes is less inuential for the mesh density on the
whole domain.
In the present study there exist 49 nodes along the blade span
in all cases. It means that the average distance between the nodes
in the spanwise direction is about 11.5 cm (0.021nblade radius).
However, the spanwise grid density is higher (by a factor of 1.2) at
the locations near root and tip which are expected to have more
complex streamlines. These higher density positions are as long
as 10% of blade radius. Further along the Z axis, from the blade tip
to the circular surface of the inner domain number of nodes is 20.
The other diameter of the inner domain which is perpendicular to
the blades pitch axis contains 63 nodes. The above node arrange-
ments lead to the maximum aspect ratios nearly 13800 and 4100
for Cases 3 and 7, respectively. For other cases the maximum
aspect ratio values are about 23800. Although for many CFD codes
the convergence of results is very sensitive to aspect ratio values,
however, CFX solver is designed to be robust and insensitive to
the aspect ratio values (Ansys-CFX Homepage).
97
For the blocks adjacent to the blade leading edge (L.E.) and
trailing edge (T.E.) in the chordwise direction, attention is paid to
the adjacent blocks rst element size to avoid an abrupt change
in the element size. However, at the tip of all cases this matter is
not satised. The reason is the sharp edge.T.E. of the S809, which
causes low mesh quality problems at the tip. Except at the
tip section, the maximum expansion ratio in the axial direction
varies from 2.2 to 3.4 from place to place in different cases.
However, at the tip section the maximum expansion ratio is
between 4.5 and 5.
For the blocks adjacent to the pressure/suction sides (exactly
upstream/downstream of the rotor plane), the number of nodes is
50 and the maximum value of cell size in the axial direction is
about 27 cm. Nevertheless, the number of nodes in far upstream
and downstream of the blades are 20 and 40 respectively; and the
maximum axial distances for these blocks are 100 cm and 200 cm.
Compared to the inner domain, the outer domain has a lower
mesh density. However, still more nodes are placed along the
edges of those surfaces that are in contact with the inner domain.
Longitudinally, there are 20 nodes from the main inlet to the
location of the upstream interface with the inner domain; 80
nodes from the upstream interface to the downstream interface
and 20 nodes from the downstream interface to the main outlet.
Besides, in the radial direction, 30 nodes are placed from the
center of domain to the location at which the radius is equal to
the inner domain radius (15 m), and 15 nodes from the inner
domain radius to outer domain radius (24 m). For the outer
domain, the cell dimensions are in the range of 25n 25n79 to
57n57n79 cm3. Moreover, the minimum angle and the minimum
mesh quality in all models are 24 degrees and 34%, respectively.
It is noteworthy that CFX uses a coupled algebraic multi-grid
technique that delivers fast and reliable convergence that is
completely scalable with mesh size; one that requires no user
input or numerical adjustments (Ansys-CFX Homepage).This
ability of CFX can compensate for the mesh size differences
between different block in inner and outer domains. However,
for both domains it is tried to make the changes in cell dimen-
sions as smoothly as possible, especially for the adjacent blocks.
4. Turbulence model, boundary conditions and simulation
The basic foundation of the SST-K-o model was rst proposed
by Wilcox (1986) and works by solving a turbulence/frequency-
based model. This Wilcox model is known as the original K-o
model. However, the SST-K-o uses Wilcox model at the walls, and
K-e model away from walls and solves the problem with the
freestream turbulence in the latter part. The use of a K-o
formulation in the inner parts of the boundary layer makes the
model directly usable all the way down to the wall through the
viscous sublayer. When the SST-K-o switches to the K-e model in
the freestream, it avoids the common Ko problem that the
model is too sensitive to the inlet freestream turbulence proper-
ties (Menter, 1994). Moreover, a blending factor ensures a smooth
transition between the two models. It is generally believed that
the SST-K-o results in relatively good solutions for the ow with a
large area of separation. Another advantage of this turbulence
model is a new capability for solving CFD problems by using the
transitional GammaTheta option to obtain even better results
(Srensen, 2008; Langtry and Menter, 2005; Langtry et al., 2006).
For general understanding of turbulence models in CFD, Wilcoxs
(2006) book provides appropriate classical information about
different turbulence models.
In this paper, all nine cases are solved at wind speeds of 4.5 m/s,
6.3 m/s, 10.3 m/s, 15.2 m/s. Case 3 is solved for more wind speeds
between 4.5 m/s to 15.2 m/s. According to Jonkman (2003),
98 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105

velocity of 4.5 m/s is less than the cut-in speed of NREL test;
however, in this paper it is investigated just as an aerodynamic
case for ow pattern.
For all cases, the inner domain is assumed to rotate at a speed
of 72 rpm, and the outer domain is taken as a stationary domain.
Air temperature is assumed to be at 25 1C with the density of
1.185 kg/m3. Inlet boundary condition is uniform axial velocity
with medium turbulence intensity of 5%. Turbulence intensity can
be selected as a predened option in CFX-Pre software. This
option is recommended by CFX manual for the situations that
the exact information for turbulence is not known at inlet. With
this option, the software automatically calculates the specic
turbulence dissipation rate (o) by using the following equation:
k
o 1
n:mT =m
where
k is the turbulence kinetic energy.
n is the kinematic viscosity.
mT/m is the eddy viscosity ratio (default value 10).
Thus, for different wind speeds the values of k and o are
presented in Table 2.
Other boundary conditions are no-slip wall at the blade surface
and constant pressure of 1 atm at outlet. Moreover, the outer
circular surface of the outer domain is considered as a free-slip
wall. To prevent numerical problem of ow in the reverse direction
at the outlet, some preliminary runs (not shown here) were done
beforehand to nd an appropriate length for the domain. Also, for
the proper domain radius some other preliminary runs( not shown
here) were carried out and the pressure distribution and 3D
streamlines in downstream ow were investigated in advance, to
be unaffected by the outer circular wall of the outer domain. The
preliminary runs led to the values of approximately 14 and 9 times
the blade radius for the domain length and radius, respectively
(Fig. 2).
Due to the velocity values, different time-steps are used for
different velocities, which are all a fraction of the value of average
chord length/ VN. For Cases 7, 8 and 9 at the velocity of 4.5 m/s
some numerical divergence occurred repeatedly. The problems
were solved by applying time-steps in the order of 1e  6 and
using the converged results of other cases as initial values.
Because all of these cases have fewer than 15 nodes within B.L,
this divergence itself can be interpreted as a need for higher
number of nodes inside the boundary layer for the SST-K-o.
In each case a different number of iterations is used for
achieving a sufcient convergence, varying from 700 to 1600
iterations. The high resolution advection scheme is chosen for the
solver. The convergence criteria are RMS values of P-Mass, U, V
and W momentums to be of the order O(10 e  4) to O(10 e 3).
Based on CFD theory, this range is not sufcient; but for HAWT
cases, a better convergence is reportedly very hard to achieve. For
Cases 7, 8 and 9 however, the RMS values are approximately O(10
e 3). Additionally, in order to assure the convergence, an extra
criterion is to check the variation of thrust value relative to the
mean value for the last 200 iterations. The acceptable value for
this criterion is chosen to be less than 1.5%.
5. Results and discussions
The results of eight cases with the SST-K-o turbulence model
and one case with the GammaTheta transitional model are
presented and compared with each other. All the results are
calculated by Ansys CFX-11. The thrust force values, ow patterns
and pressure coefcients are investigated here. Wherever useful,
interpretations from other parts are mentioned.
5.1. Thrust forces of the blade
First, the thrust forces of all cases are shown in Fig. 6. As it is
shown, all cases follow the same trend. For all of them, the
predicted values at bothVN4.5 m/s andVN15.2 m/s are
higher than experimental values. The reason for the difference
at low velocities is not clear for the authors; they might be
interpreted as the effects of laminar ow. This matter also might
be related to the problematic numerical solutions when the wind
velocity is 4.5 m/s, as explained in Section 4. On the other hand,
the deviation of all models at higher velocities can be interpreted
as the natural inability of the SST-K-o model for prediction of
separation point in highly separated ows (Hansen and Johansen,
2004; Hartwanger and Horvat, 2008). Also as it shown later in this
paper, the number of nodes in the chordwise and spanwise
directions are important.
In Fig. 6, Case 8 is an exception and shows an abnormal result
at VN 10.3 m/s. However, at VN15.2 m/s the thrust of Case
8 comes closer to the other eight cases, which is in consistence
with the similarities of streamlines and pressure coefcients at
this velocity. Also as the streamlines show, a separated ow exists
over the entire suction surface. Moreover, pressure coefcients in
Fig. 17(b) and (c) and Fig. 18(b) and (c) clearly show that the
predicted pressure values on the mid-board and outer-board of
the blade are very close.
Prior to the simulations, it was predicted that Case 7 would act
strangely. However, Case 8 shows inconsistency and amazingly
Case 7 acts in the same trend with other cases.
5.2. Flow patterns and streamlines
To achieve a more detailed understanding of the ow on the
suction surface of the blade, the streamlines on the suctions

Table 2
Values of k and o.

VN (m/s) k o

4.5 0.076 4.91E 02

6.3 0.149 9.63E 02
10.3 0.398 2.57E 03
15.2 0.867 5.61E 03
Fig. 6. Thrust value versus wind speed.
 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105 99

Fig. 7. (a). Streamline of Case 1 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Streamline of Case 1 at

Fig. 9. (a) Stream line of Case 3 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 3 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Streamline of Case 1 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Streamline of Case 1 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 3 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 3 at
V 15.2 m/s.
V 15.2 m/s.

Fig. 10. (a) Stream line of Case 4 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 4 at
Fig. 8. (a) Stream line of Case 2 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 2 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 4 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 4 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 2 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 2 at
V 15.2 m/s.
V 15.2 m/s.

surface for different velocities are shown in Figs. 715. For this
part, Case 5 is temporarily omitted while other cases are com-
pared. After comparing the other cases, Cases 4 and 5 are
compared with each other.
At VN 4.5 m/s in Cases 1 to 6 (sub-gures sufxed a in
Fig. 7 to Fig. 12), the major part of the blade surface, except a
small area near the root, is covered with attached ow with no
spanwise velocity component. However, the ow is separated in
some small areas due to the high local angle of attack (AOA). In
Cases 7 and 8 (Fig. 13(a) and Fig. 14(a)), it can be easily seen that
there exist unexpected spanwise limiting streamlines at approxi-
mately the mid-chord location. In Fig. 13(a) ow reversal from the
T.E. to this mid-chord limiting streamline can be seen, while the
streamline in Fig. 14(a) is in a different pattern and a small
separated area can be observed. This early streamline complexity Fig. 11. (a) Stream line of Case 5 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 5 at
can be also observed in Fig. 15(a) for Case 9. V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 5 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 5 at
V 15.2 m/s.
At VN 6.3 m/s in Cases 1 to 6 (sub-gures sufxed b in
Fig. 7 to Fig. 12), an attached ow is seen from the leading edge to
approximately the mid-chord position. This condition exists for underestimate the amount of attached ow. The above evidence
about 80% to 95% of the span length; out of this radial position to can be interpreted as inability of the SST-K-o for the accurate
the blade tip attached ow covers the whole chord length. For prediction of the separation when the model contains fewer than
Case 9 (Fig. 15(b)) the limiting streamline vanishes at an earlier 15 nodes inside the B.L.
position of about 65% of the blade radius. Regardless of the details For VN10.3 m/s in all cases, three dimensional spanwise
of streamlines, generally at VN6.3 m/s the attached ow exists separated ow becomes dominant on the blade surface. This
over almost 60% of the blade surface. spanwise ow is of great importance for the real value of AOA on
Comparisons between Cases 7 and 8 with Cases 1 to 6 at the blade; and consequently it has serious inuences on the
VN 6.3 m/s, clearly show different ow patterns. Both cases separation point (Carcangiu, 2008). Moreover, in each case there
100 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105
Fig. 12. (a) Stream line of Case 6 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 6 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 6 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 6 at
V 15.2 m/s.
Fig. 13. (a) Stream line of Case 7 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 7 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 7 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 7 at
V 15.2 m/s.
Fig. 14. (a) Stream line of Case 8 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 8 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 8 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 8 at
V 15.2 m/s.
is a very small area of attached ow near to the tip which covers
about 5% of blade surface. Ignoring the small differences between
the streamlines, all the cases act more similarly at this velocity
than they act at VN 6.3 m/s.
As the velocity increases to VN 15.2 m/s, the spanwise ow
covers the entire blade surface and all cases ow patterns
become almost similar. The results demonstrate that when the
ow is fully separated, all cases show the same reactions. This is
in agreement with the pressure values which are shown in Fig. 18.
In another comparison, Cases 1, 2 and 6 have almost the same
y distributions, the same number of nodes inside the B.L. and
Fig. 15. (a) Stream line of Case 9 at V 4.5 m/s. (b) Stream line of Case 9 at
V 6.3 m/s. (c) Stream line of Case 9 at V 10.3 m/s. (d) Stream line of Case 9 at
V 10.3 m/s. (e) Stream line of Case 9 at V 4.5 m/s.
the same expansion ratio, but a different number of nodes in the
chordwise direction nonetheless. At VN 4.5 m/s, Fig. 7(a) shows
that Case 1 (with 37 nodes in chordwise direction) predicts an
early commencement for the spanwise ow from the T.E. near the
root of the blade. For Case 2 (with 52 nodes in the chordwise
direction), the area with the spanwise ow becomes smaller
(Fig. 8(a)); and for Case 6 (with 81 nodes in the chordwise
direction) it almost vanishes in Fig. 12(a). At VN 6.3 m/s, the
spanwise ow turns to a T.E. separation in all three cases.
However, it can be seen that as the number of nodes in chordwise
direction increases, the separation point moves towards T.E. and
the area with separated ow becomes smaller. Therefore, for the
parts with high AOA, the number of nodes in chordwise direction
plays an important role for predicting of the separation point and
the spanwise ow existence. The latter conclusion is very notice-
able for 3D simulations of HAWTs.
In another juxtaposition, Cases 4 and 9 with the same y
distribution and the same number of nodes in chordwise are
studied. However, they have different expansion ratios and
consequently different number of nodes inside the B.L. Fig. 10(a)
and (b) and Fig. 15(a) and (b) show dramatic differences between
the ow patterns at VN 4.5 m/s and VN 6.3 m/s. On the other
hand, at VN 10.3 m/s and VN 15.2 m/s, the ow patterns
become more similar. This can be interpreted as the critical effect
of the number of nodes inside the B.L. when the ow is before or
near the separation. However, after the separation, the inuence
of the number of nodes inside the B.L. diminishes.
All the parameters of node arrangements in Cases 1 and 3 are
the same, except expansion ratio and consequently number of
nodes inside the B.L. It can be seen in Fig.7 and Fig. 9 that except
for VN 4.5 m/s the other sub-gures are very similar. This is in
agreement with the above observations for Cases 4 and 9.
Now, we focus on Case 5 to see the inuence of the transitional
model on the ow patterns. As previously mentioned, the nodes in
Cases 4 and 5 are exactly the same; but in Case 5 the GammaTheta
transitional model is used. It can be observed in Fig. 10 and Fig. 11
that the transitional model is able to capture some more complex
ow patterns, especially at VN 4.5 m/s and VN 6.3 m/s in which
the transition from laminar ow to separated ow is expected.
However, at VN 10.3 m/s and VN 15.2 m/s, because the separa-
tion point is very near to the L.E., the patterns look more alike.
5.3. Pressure coefcients on the blade
In this part, the pressure coefcients at different radial
sections are compared. The radial sections are taken with respect
 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105 101

Fig. 16. (a) Pressure coefcients at VN 6.3 m/s, r/R 30%. (b) Pressure coefcients at VN 6.3 m/s, r/R 63.3%. (c) Pressure coefcients at V 6.3 m/s, r/R 95%.

to the UAE test model at 30% (1.509 m), 63.33% (3.185 m) and 95% pN and VN are the freestream pressure and velocity, respectively.
(4.778 m) of the blades radius. Hereinafter, these locations are
called inner section, mid-section and outer section, respectively.
The pressure values are nondimensionalized based on the relative Figs. 1618 show the pressure distributions of all cases at
velocity at each section; the different radial positions. For the investigation of the results,
they are categorized into 4 groups. Wherever helpful, the follow-
V 2rel r O2 V 21 2 ing supplementary parameters are used to provide detailed
information.
1 pp1
Cp 3 EXP
2 r1 V 2rel DCp is the average of absolute values of differences
where between the CFD results and the test results.
DCpEXP
max is the maximum difference between the CFD results

r is the radial distance of the section from the axis of rotation and the test results along the chord.
DCpCFD
max is the maximum difference between the CFD results
(in Z direction);
O is the rotational speed of the blade (O 72 rpm); along the chord.
DCp CFD is the average of maximum differences between the
V rel is the relative wind at the section; max
p is the local pressure; CFD results along the chord.
102 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105

Fig. 17. (a) Pressure coefcients at VN 10.3 m/s, r/R 30%. (b) Pressure coefcients at VN 10.3 m/s, r/R 63.3%. (c) Pressure coefcients at VN 10.3 m/s, r/R 95%.

5.3.1. Group A: Cases 1, 2, 4 and 6 EXP CFD

All the meshing properties of this group lie in the typical range DCp 0:12, DCpEXP CFD
max 0:31, DCp max 0:12and DCpmax 0:2.
of the moderate density models. Cases 1, 2, 4 and 6 have 21 nodes The reasons for the improvements can be explained as follows;
inside the B.L., which is theoretically sufcient. However, they with the increase in radial distance, the ow in the spanwise
have different number of nodes in the chordwise direction. direction becomes weaker. In addition, based on the blade element
For VN 6.3 m/s at all radial positions (Fig. 16(a)(c)), the results momentum theory (BEM), as the radial distance increases the
follow the same trend as the experimental data. Agreement between blades local AOA decreases. The above reasons cause a 2D-like ow
the different cases improves with the increase in the radial distance. at the outer section and consequently an improved agreement
Moreover, at the mid-section and the outer section, the CFD results between the results is achieved.
become closer to the test results. At the inner section, the average of For VN 10.3 m/s at r/R30% (Fig. 17(a)), from the L.E. to x/c 0.6
the differences between the CFD results and the test results is the CFD results are very different from each other (DCpCFDmax 0:96,
EXP CFD EXP
DCp 0:37 and the maximum deviation of the CFD results from DCp max 0:41) and far from the test results (DCp 1:0,
the test results is DCpEXP
max 0:65. Also, the average of maximum DCpEXP
max 2:2). The reason is that because of the high AOA at the
CFD inboard section, an intense spanwise ow and consequently a
differences between CFD results is DCp max 0:13 and the maximum
complex 3D separation exists. Owing to these phenomena, all cases
difference between CFD results isDCpCFD
max 0:2. At the mid-section,
EXP CFD
fail to accurately predict the separation point. For solving this
these values become DCp 0:13, DCpEXP
max 0:4, DCp max 0:16 problem, the mesh density must be higher in the real direction of
CFD
and DCpmax 0:23; and at the outer section they change to the ow (i.e., in both spanwise and chordwise directions). However,
 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105 103

Fig. 18. (a) Pressure coefcients at VN 15.2 m/s, r/R 30%. (b) Pressure coefcients at VN 15.2 m/s, r/R 63.3%. (c) Pressure coefcients at VN 15.2 m/s, r/R 95%.

from x/c0.6 to the T.E. the results become closer (DCpCFD

max 0:15,
The misprediction of the separation point also can be seen at
CFD EXP VN 15.2 m/s in Fig. 18(a-c). However, because of the separation on
DCp max 0:1, DCp 0:12 and DCpEXP
0:18). This inability in
max
the whole airfoil, the CFD results are close to each other. For
prediction of the separation point and the pressure distribution
Fig. 18(a) the maximum and the average differences of the pressure
around it also can be seen in Fig. 17(b) in which the maximum EXP
difference between the test results and CFD results occur at x/c0.01 coefcients become DCpEXP
max 0:5, DCp 0:19, DCpCFD
max 0:36
CFD
(DCpEXP
max 2:3). Immediately after x/c0.01 the CFD results become and DCp max 0:24. With the increase in radial position, in
CFD EXP
very close to each other, (DCp max
0:01) and keep the same Fig. 18(b) these values change to DCpEXP
max 0:37, DCp 0:18,
deviation range along the whole chord length. Later in the location CFD
DCpCFD
max 0:05 and DCp max
0:03. Also at the outer section, the
of x/c0.4, the difference between the CFD results and the test
effects of misprediction of the separation point negatively affect the
values decreases to zero. However, from x/c0.4 to of x/c0.5, EXP
DCpEXP overall accuracy (DCpEXP
max 2:0,DCp 0:4, DCpCFD
max 0:1 and
max increases to 0.3 and remains constant to the T.E. Similar to
CFD
Fig. 17(b), in Fig. 17(c) the separation point is very close to the L.E.; DCp max 0:04).
but unlike Fig. 17(b), after x/c 0.01 the CFD results become different
from each other and from the test results. The maximum and the The above conclusions can be summarized as: (1) All the
average differences of pressure coefcients become DCpEXP results show the same trend and grid independence is not
max 0:4,
EXP CFD achieved. (2) The SST-K-o seriously lacks the ability for prediction
DCp 0:22, DCpCFD
max 0:32 and DCp max 0:17. of the separation point, especially in the presence of a strong
104 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105
spanwise ow. (3) In addition to the chordwise direction, atten-
tion must be paid to the number of nodes in the spanwise
direction, especially for the inboard part of a HAWT blade.
(4) In the attached ow region without the spanwise ow, the
maximum difference of 20% between the CFD results and test
results must be expected. (5) Inside the separated area, the
SST-K-o becomes insensitive to the number of nodes in the
chordwise, but the deviation of results from the test results must
be considered.
5.3.2. Group B: Cases 4, 7, 8 and 9
In this part the study of the effects of number of the nodes
inside the B.L. is presented. In Sections 5.2 and 5.3.1 it is shown
that Case 4 can be considered as a typical case for the moderate
mesh density. However in Case 9, the number of nodes inside the
B.L. is reduced by increasing the expansion ratio while other
meshing parameters are kept constant. On the other hand, Cases
7 and 8 only have seven nodes in the B.L. In a general sense,
Fig. 16 and Fig. 17 show the abnormal behavior of Cases 7 and
8 when the ow is partly attached or separated. However, for the
fully separated ow (Fig. 18), Cases 7 and 8 act more similarly as
Cases 4 and 9.
5.3.3. Group C: Cases 1 and 3
These cases are compared here for the investigation of the effects
of the rst grid positioning. For Cases 1 and 3, the y value and the
number of nodes inside the B.L. are in their acceptable ranges. Based
on this fact, the results of both cases show similar values; however,
they are slightly different at the inner section. In addition, near the
separation point the differences between their values increase.
For different wind speeds at the inner section, the values of
DCpCFD
max lie between 0.2 and 0.5. However, for the mid-section and
outer section the level of accuracy increases and DCpCFD max varies
from 0.02 to 0.07. Consequently, the average of differences
between two models behind the separation point decreases from
CFD CFD
DCp max 0:14 for the inner section to DCp max 0:03 for the outer
section.
5.3.4. Group D: Cases 4 and 5
Here Cases 4 and 5 (with the same mesh) are compared to
investigate the level of effectiveness of the GammaTheta transi-
tional model. As mentioned earlier, the misprediction of the
separation point is the weakness of the SST-K-o. To solve this
problem, the GammaTheta model is developed and enables the
solver to predict the transitional phenomenon from laminar to
turbulent ow. Moreover, the GammaTheta option enables the
prediction of reattachment phenomenon.
For VN 6.3 m/s at the inner section the results of Case 5 are
closer to the test results. For Case 4 the values of deviations are
DCpEXP
EXP
max 0:6 andDCp 0:38; however, in Case 5 they are
EXP
reduced to DCpEXP
0:25 and DCp
max 0:16.
At VN 10.3 m/s for the inner section, in Case 4 the above
EXP
values become DCpEXP
max 2:16 and DCp 0:6. But in Case 5,
these values are signicantly decreased toDCpEXP
max 1:05 and
EXP
DCp 0:4.
For VN 15.2 m/s at the inner section, because of some
unknown reasons the results of Case 5 become less accurate than
EXP
the results of Case 4. For Case 4 the values of DCpEXP
max and DCp
are 0.55 and 0.26; however, for Case 5 they become 1.02 and 0.42,
respectively.
6. Conclusions
6.1. Inuential factors for the SST-K-o
All the models in the current work have fewer than 5 million
nodes and are solved with a desktop computer with 8 GB RAM
and 4n2.4 GHz CPU. The time needed for each CFD run is about
3 day. It is concluded that for a moderate density case, the level of
accuracy sensitively depends on the following factors; the loca-
tion of separation point, the number of nodes inside the boundary
layer, the number of nodes in the chordwise and the spanwise
directions and the rst grid spacing. The results of this paper
show that for the grid independence in the chordwise directions,
still more nodes must be placed along the chord. The similar
conclusion is valid for the spanwise direction.
Generally, the results show that the SST-K-o mispredicts the
separation point, especially when the separation point is not near
the L.E. For this situation the differences between the results of
different cases and also the deviations of the results from the test
results are noticeable. However, behind the separation point the
results become closer to each other and to the test results. In
addition, for many cases it is observed that the SST-K-o over
predicts the separation. Also, the results show that in the
presence of the spanwise ow, the number of nodes in both the
spanwise direction and the chordwise direction become an
important factor.
Another very signicant factor is the number of nodes inside
the boundary layer. For a safe analysis, between 15 and 20 nodes
are required inside the boundary layer. The results of cases with
fewer than 15 nodes inside the boundary layer are seriously
inaccurate, especially near the separation point. However, amaz-
ingly the results in fully separated zones are insensitive to the
number of nodes in the B.L. Moreover, for the cases with fewer
than 15 nodes inside their B.L., the CFD models have convergence
problems.
According to the geometry of the blade, the average chord
length of the blade is approximately 500 mm. In addition, Case
4 with 50 nodes in the chordwise direction shows a normal
behavior. Thus one can conclude that the 100 nodes/m can be an
acceptable value for this class of node number.
Also as this work shows, using the transitional GammaTheta
model signicantly improves the quality of the results, especially
when the separation point is located away from L.E., where the
transition form the laminar ow to the turbulent ow becomes
important.
6.2. Blade aerodynamics
The results of this paper lead us to a general understanding
about the wind turbine blade aerodynamics. In the BEM theory
the only effect of the AOA is considered to be triggering the
separation. However, one factor that is ignored in BEM is the
spanwise ow which is caused by the changes in AOA values
along the blade. As the results show, at the inner part and even
the mid-part of the blade, this spanwise ow is very observable.
Actually, in the inner part, the spanwise ow changes the nature
of the ow from a 2D-like axial ow to a complex 3D ow.
However, in the mid-part with the decrease in AOA, the spanwise
ow becomes weaker. Further away from the blade root, the AOA
in the outer part is usually very small and the spanwise ow is
not very important. Thus, an area with 2D attached ow can be
observed at the outer part, even at high velocities. Nevertheless,
as the velocity increases, this area also becomes affected by the
separation and the whole blade stalls. The above discussions seem
to be valid in all conventional HAWTs.
 M. Moshfeghi et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 107108 (2012) 94105
7. Future works
The massive separation and the severe spanwise ow have
been observed as common phenomena in HAWTs. Although the
separation works as a braking system in the stall-regulated
HAWTs; however, weakening the separated ow, generally,
means an improvement in the captured power. For reducing the
separated ow, passive ow control technique (using narrow
channels to transfer the ow from the pressure side to the suction
side) can be investigated. Moreover, for capturing the energy of
the spanwise ow adding some ribs in the chordwise directions
might be helpful.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to acknowledge nancial support from
the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant
number 10602044 and the Program of Xian Jiaotong University
under grant number XJJ20100127.
References
Ansys ofcial website, /http://www.ansys.com/Products/Simulation Technol
ogy/Fluid Dynamics/ANSYS CFX/FeaturesS, (accessed 2.16.2012).
Carcangiu, C., 2008. CFDRANS study of horizontal axis wind turbines, PhD Thesis,
University of Cagliari, Department of Mechanical Engineering.
Chao, D.D., Van Dam, P., 2007. Computational aerodynamic analysis of a blunt
trailing-edge airfoil modication to the NREL phase VI rotor. Journal of Wind
Energy 10, 529550.
Duque, E.P.N., Burklund, M.D., Johnson, W., 2003. NavierStokes and comprehen-
sive analysis performance predictions of the NREL Phase VI experiment.
Journal of Solar Energy Engineering 125, 457467.
Gigue re, P., Selig, M.S., 1999. Design of a Tapered and Twisted Blade for the NREL
Combined Experiment Rotor, NREL/SR-500-26173.
Gonzalez, A., Munduate, X., 2008. Three-dimensional and rotational aerodynamics
on the NREL phase VI wind turbine blade. Journal of Solar Energy Engineering
130, 0310081-031008-7.
Hansen, M.O.L., Johansen, J., 2004. Tip studies using CFD and computation with tip
loss models. Journal of Wind Energy7, 343356.
Hartwanger, D., Horvat, A., 2008. 3D modeling of a wind turbine using CFD, in:
NAFEMS Conference, United Kingdom.
Jia B., 2011. Numerical simulation of aerodynamic performance of horizontal axis
wind turbine, Master Thesis, Xian Jiaotong University, School of Energy and
Power Engineering, (in Chinese).
Jonkman, J.M., 2003. Modeling of the UAE Wind Turbine for Renement of
FAST_AD, NREL/TP-500-34755.
105
Langtry, R.B., Menter, F.R., 2005. Transition modeling for general CFD applications
in aeronautics. AIAA 20052522.
Langtry, R.B., Gola, J., Menter, F.R., 2006. Predicting 2D airfoil and 3D wind turbine
rotor performance using a transition model for general CFD codes, in: 44th
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, 20060395.
Le Pape, A., Gleize, V., 2006. Improved NavierStokes computations of a stall-
regulated wind turbine using low Mach number preconditioning, in: 44th
AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, AIAA, 2006
1502.
Leishman, J.G., 2006. Principles of helicopter. Cambridge University Press ISBN:
9780521858601.
Lynch, C.E., 2011. Advanced CFD methods for wind turbine analysis, PhD Thesis,
School of Aerospace Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology.
Menter, F.R., 1993. Zonal two-equation k-o turbulence model for aerodynamic
ows, in: AIAA, Orlando, Florida, 932906.
Menter, F.R., 1994. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineer-
ing applications. AIAA Journal 32 (8), 15981605.
Menter, F.R., Kuntz, M., Langtry, R.B., 2003. Ten years of industrial experience with
the SST turbulence model, in: Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium
on Turbulence, Heat and Mass Transfer, pp. 625632.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory of United States Electronic website,
/http://www.nrel.gov/publications/S, (accessed 10.04.2011).
Potsdam, M., Mavriplis, D.J., 2009. Unstructured mesh CFD aerodynamic analysis
of the NREL Phase VI rotor, in: 47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting,
Orlando, Florida, 20091221.
Rajvanshi, D., Baig, R., Pandya, R., Nikam, K., 2011(Accepted). Wind turbine blade
aerodynamics and performance analysis using numerical simulations, in: The
11th Asian International Conference on Fluid Machinery.
Selvam R.P., 2010a. Building and bridge aerodynamics using computational wind
engineering,in: International Workshop on Wind Engineering Research and
Practice, May 2829, 2010, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Selvam R.P., 2010b. The inuence of near-wall grid resolution on the computation
of peak pressures. In: The 5th international symposium on computational
wind engineering, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA May 2327, 2010.
Srensen, J.N., 2008. CFD modeling of laminarturbulent transition for airfoils and
rotors using the gRe ~ y model. Journal of Wind Energy 12, 715733.
Snel, H., Schepers, J.G., Montgomerie, B., 2007. The MEXICO project (model
experiments in controlled conditions) The database and rst results of data
processing and interpretation. Journal of Physics Conference Series 75,
012014.
The U.S. Department of Energy, 20% wind energy by 2030, increasing wind
energys contribution to U.S. electricity supply, 2008, /http://www.nrel.gov/
docs/fy08osti/41869/pdfS, (accessed 10.04.2011).
Vermeer, L.J., Srensen, J.N., Crespo, A., 2003. Wind turbine wake aerodynamics.
Journal of Progress in Aerospace Sciences 39, 467510.
Wilcox, D.C., 1986. Multiscale model for turbulent ows, in: Proceedings of the
24th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting, 13111320.
Wilcox, D.C., 2006. Turbulence modeling for CFD, 3rd edn. DCW industries Inc
ISBN: 9781928729082.
Zahle, F., Sorenson, N.N., Johansen, J., 2009. Wind turbine rotor-tower interaction
using an incompressible overset grid method. Journal of Wind Energy 12,
594619.
Zhang, Q., 2010. Laminarturbulent transition for attached and separated ow,
PhD Thesis, Graduate School University of Kentucky.