Starting points for discussion on the Wind Turbine Design Competition (REMARK: also read the notes to the sheets

1. Starting points fordiscussion on the Wind Turbine Design Competition (REMARK: alsoread the notesto the sheets)

2. Small windturbines Problem Potential of small wind turbines is not utilized despite of their application and flexibility w.r.t. implementation. Reasons Quality backlog • Disappointing Performance (efficiency, reliability) • High specific price Knowledge gap • Difficult to compare performance between turbines • Problems with yield predictions in different (local) wind conditions • About potential and possibilities for integration (part of the) solution • Quality improvement (efficiency, cost, reliability) and innovation • Increase knowledge base (performance data and comparability, predictability of energy production, operational experience, requirements for acceptance)

3. Wind Turbine Design Competition, PLAN Goal • Innovation and education by international design competition for small wind turbines • Qualitative improvement of knowledge base by testing and operation experience • Quantitative improvement by performance measurements and monitoring (data base) Cooperation with FORWIND, UAS Bremerhaven, UAS Kiel, (InHolland?) Description • competition between student teams in the design, manufacturing and commissioning of small wind turbines Deliverables • working turbine, design report, manual, commissioning report, presentations Requirements • Compliance with standards (or selected articles) • Dimensions of turbines TBD (diameter <1.5m) • Design for a specified wind climate

4. Wind Turbine Design Competition: APPROACH Each institute may submit up to two turbines for the competition Grid connected? no further restrictions to the chosen concept Design for a wind climate typical for small wind turbines Project driven by the student teams themselves Planning • Duration 1 year / yearly organized • Detailed design, production and testing in 1st, 2nd and 3rdsemester • Submission to the competition: beginning of June • Jury evaluation and award ceremony during symposium in July

5. Wind Turbine Design Competition: Educational aspects Technical skills • Aerodynamics. • Energy conversion, • Control & safety system, • Structure and loads • Compliance with standards • Grid integration • Environmental aspects • Production • Commissioning / availability / troubleshooting • Technical report and drawings, • User manual & PR leaflet • Working in teams and project organization Other • International cooperation / competition • Knowledge exchange on symposium • “Commercial” presentation on fair

6. Wind Turbine Design Competition: Evaluation criteria Innovation: • Design features (methods for energy conversion, grid connection, control, safety system, structure, reliability and O&M solutions) • Production (suitable for mass production, number of parts, productions steps or actions) • Environmental aspects (material and energy use, cradle to cradle) • Visual appearance and acceptance, integration (integration in built environment, buildings) Quality • Energy production in specified wind climate • Energy pay back time • Reliability and O&M solutions • Design report and drawings, manual • Presentation on symposium / fair Evaluation by a jury (teachers, specialists and others) based on product assessment, design report, commissioning report, measurements)

7. Wind Turbine Design Competition: to be DETERMINED • The plan • Wind turbines: size?, grid connected or not?, compliance with standards? • Participation (invitations to other institutes?) • Contact persons for the organization • Agenda, planning • Final ceremony: activities, prizes, date, jury,… • What are the IEC requirements for small wind turbines? • ………..

8. NHL approach, followed in2012 • 2nd year / no basics in fluentmechanicsyet • Preparation course: • Explanation on P-V, wind climate, energy production • Cp-lambdafor different WT conceptsfromliterature • Starting points: wind climate / dimensions / safetyrequirements • Load dimensioning (generator design & testing) • Fabricationandassembly • Commisioning • Testing

9. CommentPeter Schaffarczyk, UAS Kiel, • Criterium forevaluation: usehighest energy production in moderate V claimateand high σ • Let studentsalso make a “begroting”: productionhours, planning, costs(education: compromises must be made, $ is limited) • Comparewithformula “student competitions” • Use low voltage: safety, education(instead of buying black box) • Hmax< 10m • Likesmeasurement on a car. • Study cv = strict, littleflexibilityct NL • 8-10 creditsforthis project (30 in a semester)

10. Comment Stephan Barth, Michael Holling, FORWIND • Preferstesting in wind tunnel over testing on a driven platform (ref Andrea Reuter: WT on Volvo = unreliable/ permissiononlyfor GB basedindustry) • Suggests DLR wind tunnel or 2x2m wt in Varel van Deutsche Wind Gard (of een grote wt in Wilhelmshaven?) • 1 year is toolittle time forthisproject (not real) • No problemwithparticipating at a later stage • KISS in the beginning of the project • Safety = important • Askforevidence of max loads and RPM • Complywithsimplified load assumptions • “certificationcommitte: ask GH • E is maost important criterium. Tobemeasured in wind tunnel (ramp V test performance andquality of control andsafety system)

11. CommentHenry Seifert, UAS Bremerhaven • Important: 1 robustness, 2 robustness, 3 robustness, • bremerhaven has anairstripthatwillbeclosed next year: goodrunwayfordriven platform • Safety = important • Complywithsimplified load assumptionstobedeterminedby “certification body”, oaVmax • invite industry (jury, material sponsors, • Specify the measurement system • Duration? 1 or 1.5 yearfor complete program. High workloadforstudents, theywillcomplain • Planning: specification, design withcertification report, evaluation report and go/nogo, production, commisisoning, measuring, symposium. • Up toandincludingcertif report: 25 credits, rest 5 credits • Blade testingaccto IEC definedbycommission