Method for Optimizing a Wind Power Installation

Abstract

The present disclosure relates to a method for assessing a wind power installation, wherein a comparison is made between a test wind power installation and a comparison wind power installation for assessment purposes, comprising the steps of: synchronously operating the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation in an adjustment interval in an adjustment mode, in which the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation have matching operating settings, synchronously recording performance data relating to both wind power installations in each case in the adjustment interval in the adjustment mode, modifying the test wind power installation and/or the comparison wind power installation in a modification step such that the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation differ from one another, synchronously operating the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation, which differ from one another, at least in a comparison interval in a comparison mode, synchronously recording performance data in the comparison mode, and evaluating the performance data recorded in the adjustment mode and comparison mode in an evaluation step.

Claims

1. A method for assessing a wind power installation, based on a comparison between a test wind power installation and a comparison wind power installation, the method comprising: synchronously operating the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation in an adjustment interval in an adjustment mode, in which the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation have matching operating settings; synchronously recording performance data relating to the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation in the adjustment interval in the adjustment mode; modifying at least one of the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation in a modification step such that the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation differ from one another; synchronously operating the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation, which differ from one another, at least in a comparison interval in a comparison mode; synchronously recording performance data in the comparison mode; and evaluating the performance data recorded in the adjustment mode and the comparison mode.

2. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein a further change is made to at least one of the operating settings on the test wind power installation and the operating settings on the comparison wind power installation in at least one further comparison interval in the comparison mode, performance data relating to the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation are recorded synchronously in the at least one further comparison interval, and the performance data recorded in the at least one further comparison interval are evaluated to determine differences between the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation.

3. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the test wind power installation differs from the comparison wind power installation in at least one of the comparison interval and the at least one further comparison interval by at least one differing component part, and the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation have matching operating settings in the at least one of the comparison interval and the at least one further comparison interval, or the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation are structurally identical in the at least one of the comparison interval and the at least one further comparison interval, and the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation are operated with different operating settings in the at least one of the comparison interval and the at least one further comparison interval in order to assess-determine different performance data caused by the different operating settings.

4. The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the test wind power installation is structurally modified in the modification step, and the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation have differing operating settings in the comparison interval or the at least one further comparison interval.

5. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one of the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation are synchronously modified based on a changeover signal, the changeover signal is transmitted from a central controller, which is superordinate to the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation, to the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation, and the changeover signal triggers a synchronous start of the comparison interval.

6. The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein the adjustment interval, the comparison interval and the at least one further comparison interval each has a duration equal to a test time, wherein the test time is in a range of 1 minute to 60 minutes.

7. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the operating settings include at least one of a speed-power characteristic curve, or a speed-torque characteristic curve, a target speed value, a target power value, a pitch characteristic curve, and an azimuth offset angle by which an azimuth orientation deviates from a direction directly into the wind.

8. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein an attachment by which the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation differ is at least one of a rotor blade, an aerodynamically active element on one or more rotor blades, serrations, vortex generators, and Gurney flaps, and a generator.

9. The method as claimed in claim 2, wherein The test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation are structurally identical in at least one of the comparison interval and the at least one further comparison interval except for at least one differing component part.

10. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the method is used to measure a power curve of the test wind power installation, wherein power values of the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation are recorded for each comparison mode, and the power curve of the test wind power installation and a power curve of the comparison wind power installation are gradually recorded as a result, wherein the power values or estimates of associated wind speed are recorded.

11. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one further test wind power installation to yield a plurality of test wind power installations are used, and the plurality of test wind power installations are modified in the comparison interval such that respective operating settings of one or more of the plurality of test wind power installations differ from one another or from the operation settings of the comparison wind power installation.

12. A wind power installation arrangement comprising at least one test wind power installation and a comparison wind power installation, prepared to assess the test wind power installation, wherein the wind power installation arrangement is prepared to carry out an assessment method, wherein a comparison is made between the at least one test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation, and the assessment method comprises: synchronously operating the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation in an adjustment interval in an adjustment mode, in which the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation have matching operating settings, synchronously recording performance data relating to the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation installations in the adjustment interval in the adjustment mode; modifying at least one of the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation in a modification step such that the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation differ from one another; synchronously operating the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation, which differ from one another, at least in a comparison interval in a comparison mode; synchronously recording performance data in the comparison mode; and evaluating the performance data recorded in the adjustment mode and the comparison mode.

13. The wind power installation arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein at least one control device of the wind power installation arrangement, is configured to implement the assessment method.

14. The wind power installation arrangement as claimed in claim 12, wherein a coordination device is provided for coordinating synchronous changing of the test wind power installation and the comparison wind power installation.

Description

[0098] The present disclosure is now explained in more detail below by way of example with reference to the accompanying figures.

[0099] FIG. 1 shows a perspective illustration of a wind power installation.

[0100] FIG. 2 shows a schematic illustration of a wind farm.

[0101] FIG. 3 shows a simplified flowchart of a proposed method.

[0102] FIG. 1 shows a schematic illustration of a wind power installation according to some aspects of the present disclosure. The wind power installation 100 has a tower 102 and a nacelle 104 on the tower 102. An aerodynamic rotor 106 having three rotor blades 108 and a spinner 110 is provided on the nacelle 104. During the operation of the wind power installation, the aerodynamic rotor 106 is set in rotational motion by the wind and thereby also rotates an electrodynamic rotor or armature of a generator, which is coupled directly or indirectly to the aerodynamic rotor 106. The electric generator is arranged in the nacelle 104 and produces electrical energy. The pitch angles of the rotor blades 108 may be changed by pitch motors at the rotor blade roots 109 of the respective rotor blades 108.

[0103] The wind power installation 100 in this case has an electric generator 101, which is indicated in the nacelle 104. Electrical power can be generated by way of the generator 101. An infeed unit 105, which may be designed in particular as an inverter, is provided for the purpose of feeding in electrical power. It is thus possible to generate a three-phase infeed current and/or a three-phase infeed voltage in terms of amplitude, frequency and phase, for feeding in at a grid connection point PCC. This may be performed directly or else together with other wind power installations in a wind farm. An installation controller 103 is provided for the purpose of controlling the wind power installation 100 and also the infeed unit 105. The installation controller 103 may also receive predefined values from an external source, in particular from a central farm computer.

[0104] FIG. 2 shows a wind farm 112 having, by way of example, three wind power installations 100 A, 100 B and 100 C which can be the same or different. They are the same, especially in an adjustment mode. They can then be changed. The wind power installations 100 A and 100 B can each form a test wind power installation, and the wind power installation 100 C can form a comparison wind power installation. The three wind power installations 100 A, 100 B and 100 C are also representative of basically any number of wind power installations in a wind farm 112. The wind power installations 100 A, 100 B and 100 C provide their power, specifically in particular the generated current, via an electrical farm grid 114. In this case, the respectively generated currents or powers of the individual wind power installations 100 A, 100 B and 100 C are added up and a transformer 116, which steps up the voltage in the farm, is usually provided in order to then feed into the supply grid 120 at the infeed point 118, which is also generally referred to as the PCC. FIG. 2 is only a simplified illustration of a wind farm 112. For example, the farm grid 114 may be designed differently by virtue of a transformer, for example, also being present at the output of each wind power installation 100 A, 100 B and 100 C, to name just one other exemplary embodiment.

[0105] The wind farm 112 additionally has a central farm computer 122, which may also be referred to synonymously as a central farm controller. This can be connected to the wind power installations 100 A, 100 B and 100 C via data lines 124 or wirelessly in order to exchange data with the wind power installations via this connection and in particular to receive measured values from the wind power installations 100 A, 100 B and 100 C and to transmit control values to the wind power installations 100 A, 100 B and 100 C. The central farm computer or the central farm controller may have or form a control device of the wind power installation arrangement, which is prepared to carry out a method according to one of the aspects described. However, such a control device can also be housed individually in each wind power installation.

[0106] FIG. 3 shows method steps of the optimization method in the simplified flowchart. The method shown can be implemented in a process computer of one of the wind power installations or in a farm computer.

[0107] The flowchart 300 basically begins with the start step 302, according to which the test wind power installation WT1 and the comparison wind power installation WT2, according to one configuration, are provided as structurally identical with all the same operating settings. In an adjustment operating step 304, the two wind power installations, i.e. the test wind power installation WT1 and the comparison wind power installation WT2, are operated in an adjustment interval. The adjustment operating step 304 is representative of or synonymous for an adjustment mode. In this case, both wind power installations are the same, including their settings. However, variations can also be made in the adjustment operating step 304, but in the same manner and synchronously for both wind power installations. During this operation, i.e. in this first comparison interval or comparison period, measurements are recorded and stored, at least temporarily stored, namely for both wind power installations, which is illustrated by the initial data step 306. The test wind power installation WT1 and the comparison wind power installation WT2 can correspond to the wind power installations 100 B and 100 C, respectively, in FIG. 2.

[0108] These data thus recorded in the initial data step 306 are used to determine and also quantitatively assess the extent to which the two wind power installations WT1 and WT2 differ in terms of their operation. In particular, the generated power values can be compared and it can be recognized whether, despite assumed equality of both wind power installations WT1 and WT2, differences exist and how large they are.

[0109] Such an initial evaluation is illustrated in the initial evaluation step 308. Here, it is possible to determine a correction factor F.sub.cor which can be a quotient of the output power of the test wind power installation WT1 to the output power of the comparison wind power installation WT2, which is intended to be illustrated by this initial evaluation step 308 by way of the simplified formula.

[0110] However, it should be taken into consideration that it cannot be expected for there to be a single correction factor that fully reflects the difference between the two wind power installations WT1 and WT2. Rather, it can be assumed that the differences between the two wind power installations also depend on the specific operating points and operating settings. For example, not only does one wind power installation always have to produce more power than the other, but it can also be the other way around and there may also be a fluctuation in the specific values.

[0111] In this respect, the initial evaluation step 308 should be understood symbolically, but in a simplified case it comes into consideration that a correction factor F.sub.cor represents a difference between the two wind power installations well. This can be the case, for example, if one of the two wind power installations always experiences slightly less wind, i.e. weaker wind, than the other wind power installation, due to the terrain on which the two wind power installations are installed.

[0112] However, it also comes into consideration that the two wind power installations WT1 and WT2 are already not structurally identical in the adjustment operating step and that differences in the behavior of the two wind power installations caused by the structural difference are captured in the adjustment operating step. Here too, these captured differences, which were evaluated in the initial evaluation step 308, are taken as a basis for the further method.

[0113] Once such an adjustment has taken place, the test wind power installation can be modified, which is illustrated by the modification step 310. In the modification step 310, the test wind power installation WT1, for example, can be provided with vortex generators on its rotor blades, while the comparison wind power installation WT2 has no or different vortex generators. In particular, the comparison wind power installation WT2 remains unchanged, i.e. is structurally the same as it was in the adjustment operating step 304.

[0114] After the modification step 310, a comparison operating step 312 is then carried out. The comparison operating step 312 basically corresponds to the adjustment operating step 304, but the test wind power installation WT1 and the comparison wind power installation WT2 are not identical in the comparison operating step 312. They differ in particular in that the test wind power installation WT1 was modified in the modification step 310. In the comparison operating step 312, the two wind power installations WT1 and WT2 thus have at least one structural difference and/or at least one different operating setting, e.g. a different operating characteristic curve.

[0115] The different wind power installations WT1 and WT2 are then operated in the comparison operating step 312 and at least one operating setting is also changed synchronously for both wind power installations WT1 and WT2. For example, the test wind power installation WT1 could have vortex generators, but not the comparison wind power installation WT2. For these different wind power installations, simultaneous operation of the two wind power installations WT1 and WT2 can then take place in the comparison operating step 312 in order to test and assess the set parameters.

[0116] However, in the comparison operating step 312, an identical and simultaneous change can also be carried out for both wind power installations, such as slowly changing the blade angle, for example via a ramp from 2 to 3. It also comes into consideration to perform the variation in individual steps. For the example of changing the blade angle, this can mean that both wind power installations are first operated at 2, then, for example after 30 seconds, both wind power installations are operated at a blade angle of 2.5 and even later, especially another 30 seconds later, both wind power installations are operated at a blade angle of 3. This is also just one example. Another example is that the two wind power installations WT1 and WT2 differ in terms of an operating characteristic curve. A different operating characteristic curve would therefore be set for use for the test wind power installation WT1 than for the comparison wind power installation WT2. For this example, a synchronous change of both wind power installations is then also performed during operation, which can also again be the change of the blade angle, as described above.

[0117] This is also just another example of how both wind power installations can be operated with the same synchronous changes.

[0118] Data, which are referred to in particular as performance data, are recorded again. In particular, this can be a power generated. These captured data are recorded in the data recording step 314. Correction relationships of which the correction factor F.sub.cor is representative are also recorded in the data recording step 314. All these collected data can then be transferred to the evaluation step 316. In this evaluation step 316, the performance data relating to the test wind power installation WT1 can be compared with the comparison wind power installation WT2. For this purpose, the difference, which was determined in the initial evaluation step 308, can be taken into account, that is to say removed, by means of the correction factor F.sub.cor or more extensive or other correction data.

[0119] The evaluation in the evaluation step 316 can also take into account particularly diverse boundary conditions and operating conditions and can be assigned to the performance data. The performance data or, in particular, the recorded performance of the test wind power installation can be adjusted using the correction factor F.sub.cor or corresponding correction data. In the evaluation step 316, the adjusted performance data relating to the test wind power installation WT1 are then compared, in particular, with the recorded performance data relating to the comparison wind power installation WT2. The comparison, with and/or without the calculation of a contrast such as a factor between the performance data relating to the two wind power installations, can be stored.

[0120] For example, the adjusted performance of the test wind power installation, together with the performance of the comparison wind power installation, can be stored together with operating parameters such as speed, blade angle and together with environmental conditions such as wind speed, wind direction, gustiness, temperature, air density. For this storage, FIG. 3 illustrates the data storage step 318.

[0121] The performance data relating to the two wind power installations, including their contrast if appropriate, that are collected and stored in the data storage step 318 can then be used for optimization. In particular, it is possible to read from these data which changes to the test wind power installation have yielded an advantage, specifically not only at a single working point, but also in the light of the variation of the working point.

[0122] Insofar as the modifications of the test wind power installation can also be changed during operation, which is the case in particular for operating settings, an optimization can be carried out based on the assessment and can be carried out in such a way that different modifications are selected for different operating states and/or environmental conditions. For example, a changed operating characteristic curve could have a positive effect at low wind speeds, but it might have a negative effect at higher speeds. In this case, such an operating characteristic curve could only be implemented for the low wind speeds, but not for the higher ones. Of course, based on this illustrative example, the operating characteristic curve could then also only be partially changed accordingly. A new operating characteristic curve could therefore be designed. In this respect, the described method, also according to each aspect described and each claim, can also be referred to as a method for optimization or optimization method.

[0123] In order to assess many modifications of the test wind power installation, a repetition loop 320 is also proposed. The repetition loop 320 results in the modification step 310 being carried out again after the comparison operating step 312. In the modification step 310, other modifications are then accordingly carried out as before. It thus also comes into consideration that a structural modification is carried out in one modification step, but a modification of operating settings is carried out in another modification step. In a yet further modification step, these two modifications, i.e. the structural modifications and the modifications of operating settings, can be combined. It is also possible to combine completely new combinations of structural modifications and modifications of the operating settings.

[0124] Preferably, it is first checked whether certain modifications make it possible to expect an improvement at all and/or it is checked whether planned modifications, if a plurality of modifications are planned, fit together. For example, it might already be known that only a smaller range of operating characteristic curves fits a certain blade angle, e.g. a particularly large blade angle, in partial load operation, and thus a large blade angle cannot be combined with any other, but suitable, operating characteristic curve.

[0125] In addition, the method may be terminated if, as the result of the optimization, appropriate structural modifications and/or modifications of the operating settings have been selected and these are carried out or maintained on the test wind power installation and are also carried out on the comparison wind power installation, or if a sufficient amount of performance data has been recorded. The result can also be applied to other wind power installations, especially those in the same wind farm, but also to other wind power installations that are not located in the wind farm.

[0126] In particular, the following was recognized according to the present disclosure.

[0127] In the new development phase of a wind power installation, the duration of installation optimization is of great importance. It is important to identify the optimum operating parameters for a wind power installation type as quickly as possible in order to find the perfect constellation of loads, sound and power.

[0128] For the validation of new operating parameters, these were previously measured and evaluated, for example in 10-minute intervals, against the reference parameters. This validation takes a very long time, especially if there is only a small free measurement sector in which measurement can be performed.

[0129] The present disclosure can be explained using the following examples.

[0130] According to a first example, an operating parameter optimization is performed for rotor blade additions (so-called rotor blade add-ons), generators and other elements. In general, alternative component parts relevant to performance (i.e. performance-relevant) can be tested and assessed.

[0131] Two wind power installations with different alternative component parts are tested here. Depending on the alternative component part, changes in operating parameters may have a greater or lesser effect on the wind power installation's sound, loads and power than the standard component part to be investigated. In the inventive simultaneous testing of a changed wind power installation and an unchanged wind power installation, which is referred to here as synchronous toggling, the same installation operation, e.g. a pitch characteristic curve or operating characteristic curve (which can also be referred to as a pitch curve or operating curve), and further curves, is respectively run simultaneously for a certain time (e.g. 10 min). For example, the process would start with the standard operating parameters, and an operating parameter optimization is respectively run in a second, third and further interval. Each interval can also be referred to as a toggle interval. The first interval is used to determine the base delta, i.e. how the wind power installations differ in terms of sound, load and/or power due to the alternative component part. In the second and further intervals, the base delta can now be used to make a statement about how changed operating parameters affect the alternative component part. This can provide important insights for the design and operation of the component parts.

[0132] According to a second example, an accelerated operating parameter optimization is performed.

[0133] This requires two identical wind power installations. Here again, it is important that both wind power installations run the standard operating parameters in a first interval, i.e. in a first toggle interval, so that there is a relative comparison between the two wind power installations. Different performance due to blade angle errors, production inaccuracy, rotor blade condition, etc. is adjusted.

[0134] In the next interval, the two wind power installations run different optimized operating parameters. This allows more operating parameter optimizations to be validated faster. In particular, the following constellations are proposed.

[0135] In a first interval, both wind power installations are run with standard operating parameters. In a second interval, the two wind power installations are run with different operating parameters. The different operating parameters are used for potential optimization and can therefore also be referred to as different optimizations.

[0136] It is also possible, and is proposed, that in the second interval or a further interval one of the wind power installations, e.g. the first one, is run with changed operating parameters according to a first change, but the other is run with standard operating parameters. In yet further intervals, the first of the wind power installations is run with standard operating parameters and the other is run with changed operating parameters according to a second change.

[0137] Areas of application of the present disclosure are in particular operating parameter optimization for rotor blade add-ons, changed generators and other applications in which generally alternative performance-relevant component parts are tested with regard to their effect on the load, sound and/or power behaviour of the wind power installation.

[0138] Accelerated operating parameter optimization is possible.

[0139] Acceleration in the optimization of operating parameters of wind power installations can thus be achieved. Help with the investigation of the optimal operating parameters for alternative component part variants is possible, e.g. for rotor blade add-ons, generator versions and other component part variants.

[0140] In particular, the following disadvantages can be improved. An effect of performance-relevant component parts could previously be validated with the following steps. In this case, the performance of a wind power installation was measured beforehand, which could take 2-3 months, and then the alternative component parts were installed and the wind power installation was measured again. Due to the seasonal differences in wind characteristics and/or rotor blade contamination, it was only very difficult to draw conclusions from the changed behaviour, i.e. the changed performance of the alternative component parts and their optimization. The problem has now been overcome.

[0141] According to the present disclosure, it was therefore possible to improve the validation of performance-relevant component parts with regard to their effect on the sound, the loads and/or the power. The process of optimizing wind power installation operating parameters can be accelerated.