1 / 14

Water Power Peer Review

Water Power Peer Review. Development of an MHK Model for the Assessment of In-stream Energy Removal and Environmental Effects. Dr. Zhaoqing Yang. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory zhaoqing.yang@pnnl.gov 206-528-3057 November 3, 2011. 2.1.3: Effects on Physical Systems.

jeneil
Download Presentation

Water Power Peer Review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Water Power Peer Review Development of an MHK Model for the Assessment of In-stream Energy Removal and Environmental Effects Dr. Zhaoqing Yang Pacific Northwest National Laboratory zhaoqing.yang@pnnl.gov 206-528-3057 November 3, 2011 2.1.3: Effects on Physical Systems

  2. Purpose, Objectives, & Integration • Extraction of in-stream energy needs state-of-the-art numerical models to enhance our understanding • Resource characterization – maximum energy potential • Technology and environmental barriers • Processes at various spatial and temporal scales • Development of an MHK model to assess • Resource characterization • Effects on physical environment at local and system wide scales • Optimal siting and array configuration • Results of the MHK model can be used for • Categorizing and evaluating effects of stressors • Assessing environmental risks to aquatic biota and habitats

  3. Technical Approach • 3D Finite Volume Coastal Ocean Model (FVCOM) • Unstructured grid – well suited for complex geometry and various scales • Parallel computing – large domain and number of tidal turbines • Water quality • Sediment transport • WRF met forcing • Coupled SWAVE • Public domain Cell size ~ 15m Turbines Velocity Field

  4. Technical Approach Momentum sink approach (retarding force) • Modification of momentum governing equations • Turbine representation • Turbine blades • Supporting structures • Turbine foundations

  5. Technical Approach Validation to analytical solution (2D mode) • Idealized tidal channel and bay with realistic dimensions and forcing • Open boundary M2 tide (2m range) • User-friendly MHK parameter input • Turbine elevation from seabed • Turbine diameter • Turbine thrust coefficient • Turbine blade drag coefficient • Areas of supporting poles and base • Drag coefficients for poles and base

  6. Plan, Schedule, & Budget Schedule • Initiation date: October 1, 2009 • Milestones: • FY10 Q2: Refinement/validation of Puget Sound models • FY10 Q4: Online dissemination of model results for the real-time Puget Sound Operational Forecast System (PS-OPF) • FY11 Q2: MHK model development • FY11 Q3: MHK model validation • FY11 Q4: Analysis of effects on flux, flushing, and array configurations Plan • Planned completion date: September 30, 2012 • Analysis of MHK effects on water quality, sediment transport and food web Budget

  7. Accomplishments and Results • MHK model results agree well with analytical solution • Diminishing return of extractable power occurs when volume flux reduces by 42% • MHK model is also validated with widely used bottom drag approach in 2-D mode Flood Tide Flood Tide Reduced current speed with turbines Tidal currents without turbines

  8. Accomplishments and Results • Three-dimensional effects • Volume flux reduction at maximum extractable power is smaller in 3D than that in 2D mode • Maximum extractable power varies with turbine height due to 3D structure of velocity profiles Extractable Power and Volume Flux Reduction in 3D mode Maximum Power 33% Reduction

  9. Accomplishments and Results • MHK effects on flushing time of the bay • Model results show that MHK devices have greater effect on the relative change in flushing time than the change in volume flux • Relative change of flushing time increases exponentially as a function of percentage reduction of the volume flux

  10. Accomplishments and Results • Effects of different array configurations • “Optimal” vs. practical constraints • Placement of turbines in the channel • Extracted power, volume flux, flushing time, etc. Extracted power: 207 MW Extracted power: 171 MW Dye concentration for center configuration (408 turbines) Dye concentration for side configuration (408 turbines) Velocity for MHK Side Configuration Velocity for MHK Center Configuration

  11. Accomplishments and Results • The MHK model can be applied to river and ocean current environments • Cumulative effect and interaction of multiple projects • Change of hydrodynamic conditions at local and system scales • Model setup for an idealized river connected to a bay • Bay depth = 200m; length = 100km; width = 750m; slope = 5x10-4 • Forcing: M2 tide (1.0m tidal range); river flow = 15,000 m3 • Grid size varies from 36 m (river) to 580 m (bay) • 10 projects along the river with 90 turbines per project Tide River inflow Bottom elevation = 50m

  12. Accomplishments and Results • MHK effects at local and system scales • Slow down the river • Increase water level • Local variations Without Turbine Velocity (m/s) Upstream Downstream With Turbine Without Turbine Water Depth (m) With Turbine

  13. Challenges to Date • Further model validation and application • Long-term physical and biogeochemical data with MHK devices installed • Tidal turbine parameterizations (collaboration with developers) • Model simulations in real world, even pilot-scale study (e.g., Puget Sound) • Need of theoretical analysis • Alternative for model validation • General guidance to the relationship between energy extraction, turbine size, circulation and transport processes • Balancing energy extraction and environmental effects • Integration of other environmental stressors • Regulatory criteria for environmental impacts Predicted tidal currents with PNNL Puget Sound model

  14. Next Steps (FY12) • Modeling analysis of MHK effects on water quality • Development of a generic, good baseline condition of water quality model • Realistic atmospheric forcing, heat flux and boundary conditions • Simulation of salinity, temperature, and algal/nutrient dynamics • Long-term simulations (seasonal variations) – high performance computing • MHK effects on sediment transport and food web • Analysis of MHK effects on relative changes of deposition/erosion patterns • Food web – what is the main physical driving force, temperature? • Future research • Modeling analysis in the real world (tides and river) • Hydrodynamics (far-field effects: tide flats) • Water quality – mixing and hypoxia • Ocean currents (FVCOM in modeling test bed project for Gulf of Mexico)

More Related