Reference no: EM134013329

Bladeless Wind Turbine Numerical Analysis

Learning Outcome 1: Demonstrate an in-depth understanding of and critically evaluate numerical methods that underpin CFD.

Learning Outcome 2: Apply engineering principles to evaluate various general flow mechanisms for aerodynamics.

Learning Outcome 3: Apply suitable analytical, experimental, and numerical methods for aerodynamics problems.

Learning Outcome 4: Function effectively as an individual and a team member to address aerodynamic problems.

Assignment briefing:

Introduction
The CTO of Resource Ltd. (a start-up in the making) would like to know the operational ranges of a bladeless wind turbine and how it can be improved. They are seeking your CFD expertise to assess whether the system is worth investing in or requires further development. Should you choose to select this project, your group will be tasked to create a model of a Bladeless Wind Turbine.

Building on your experience with the numerical model created during the supervised tutorial sessions, 'Formula One Rear Wing,' you are expected to develop a new simulation around the Bladeless Wind Turbine. In your model, try to improve the mesh quality and use this enhanced simulation to analyse the provided design at two different flow velocities (for high and low wind speeds). The only deliverable for this assignment is a concise technical presentation detailing the final CFD methodology used (i.e., the simulation with the bladeless-turbine geometry and mesh enhancements) and the simulation results obtained.

Part 1
Consider the CFD simulations created during the supervised tutorial sessions; however, follow the relevant tutorial steps with the new geometry provided in this assignment. As the geometry is different (see Figure 1), you may need to adjust the size of the computational domain as well as the position of the geometry in it. Moreover, the mesh refinement areas may differ from those in the guided tutorial session. Using a constant flow velocity of 45m/s, apply your knowledge in CFD to the methodology (from the guided tutorial) and show that any changes you propose improve mesh quality and solution convergence. You may find the following prompts helpful when considering which aspects of the simulation methodology to modify:

Is the assumption of steady, incompressible, turbulent flow appropriate?
What are the thermodynamic properties of the working fluid used in this simulation?
Is symmetric modelling of the wind turbine adequate, or should the full turbine geometry be considered?
How do you ensure appropriate domain size in your simulations?
How was the surface meshing strategy assessed?
What was the volume meshing strategy your group chose? Why?
Has the boundary layer of the flow been adequately captured? How can this be verified?
How did you demonstrate mesh independence? Why is this important?

How can the efficiency of different meshing strategies be quantified and compared?
How can an improvement in solution convergence be demonstrated?

Part 2
Briefly summarise your chosen simulation strategy:

Outline the final mesh settings, including the base size, the surface/volume type, the boundary layer parameters, and any areas of local mesh refinement. Justify your choices.
Detail all boundary types used and the physics imposed at each boundary.
Describe the chosen turbulence model. What are the advantages/disadvantages of this model compared to the other available turbulence models?

Part 3
Once the enhanced wind-turbine simulation strategy has been finalised, it should be used to simulate the turbine flow field at 15 m/s, the individualised flow velocity, and the individualised flow velocity corresponding to your Group's number.

Firstly, report the findings from each simulation:

What are the differences in pressure coefficients between the two velocities? Does this match your expectations, considering a simple analytical analysis?

Describe any differences in the on-surface and off-body flow observed between the two cases. Justify the post-processing used to communicate these results (i.e., outline the design information each type of post-processing provides the reader).

To compare the turbine performance at the two velocities, try plotting pressure coefficient graphs (from the exact location on the geometry). What information can you extract from those plots?

How does the maximum pressure drop change between the two velocities?

What are the running parameters of your simulations (i.e. solution time, number of iterations to convergence, residual convergence)? Are these acceptable?

Finally, summarise the overall findings from this study in a concluding paragraph. You could use this paragraph in your presentation to reflect on the modelling process, the outcomes and the possible insights into the aerodynamic behaviour of the bladeless wind turbine.

Deliverables:
Your team can select one of the following submission formats: a presentation with a voice-over recording, a poster presentation with a voice-over recording, or a podcast. The recording should not exceed 5 minutes (10%) at a regular (x1) playback speed; it should be technical, informative and evidence-based, clearly communicating the numerical model and your findings. Ideally, each team member would contribute to the recorded session. You should nominate someone from your group to submit via the StudyNet/Canvas portal. This can be in PPTX, MP4, or another multimedia file format.

Follow an engineering presentation structure, including elements such as (but not limited to) an abstract/executive summary, brief model description, numerical findings/analysis and conclusion.

Use external references to support your arguments and conclusions, where appropriate. (Include only relevant fact-checked references.) Use engineering language and terminology appropriate for a professional engineering environment. Students seeking additional guidance in mechanical engineering and fluid mechanics concepts may refer to relevant academic resources.

Additionally:

For presentations and posters, the references must be given in either the Harvard or Vancouver style.
For podcasts, the references should be submitted as a separate Word file formatted under Harvard or Vancouver style.