Upload
mohan-krishna
View
222
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
1/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OF STEELWINDTURBINETOWERS
IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
by
Elena Nuta
A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements
for the degree of Master of Applied Science
Graduate Department of Civil Engineering
University of Toronto
Copyright by Elena Nuta (2010)
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
2/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- ii -
Seismic Analysis of Steel Wind Turbine Towers in the Canadian Environment
Master of Applied Science (2010)
Elena Nuta
Department of Civil Engineering
University of Toronto
ABSTRACT
The seismic response of steel monopole wind turbine towers is investigated and their risk is
assessed in the Canadian seismic environment. This topic is of concern as wind turbines are
increasingly being installed in seismic areas and design codes do not clearly address this aspect of
design. An implicit finite element model of a 1.65MW tower was developed and validated.
Incremental dynamic analysis was carried out to evaluate its behaviour under seismic excitation, to
define several damage states, and to develop a framework for determining its probability of damage.
This framework was implemented in two Canadian locations, where the risk was found to be low for
the seismic hazard level prescribed for buildings. However, the design of wind turbine towers is
subject to change, as is the design spectrum. Thus, a methodology is outlined to thoroughly
investigate the probability of reaching predetermined damage states under seismic loading for future
considerations.
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
3/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- iii -
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would firstly like to express my gratitude to Professor J. A. Packer and to Professor C.
Christopoulos for their guidance and the countless meetings that ensured my project was always on
track. I see now, in retrospect, how paramount this guidance was, and I thank you both.
Special thanks go out to Andrew Voth and Dr. Gilberto Martinez-Saucedo, for many hours of
help working out finite element modelling glitches, and to Lydell Wiebe and Nabil Mansour, for
their willingness to always discuss thesis concerns with me. I would also like to thank my many
officemates, research group members, and colleagues for enriching my graduate experience and
providing conversation and laughter.
Financial support has been provided by Ontario Graduate Scholarships (OGS), the National
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Steel Structures Education
Foundation (SSEF). I also gratefully acknowledge the Ontario Centres of Excellence (OCE), and
the Fraunhofer Centre Windenergie und Meerestechnik, Bremerhaven, Germany where I spent the
summer of 2008 as an intern.
Last but not least, I thank the people most important in my life. To my awesome parents,
Floarea and Mihai Nuta, thank you for teaching me to always aim high and for supporting me
always. To my beautiful sister and brother-in-law, Gabriela Nuta and Andrew Orel-Golla, thank you
for making sure I had enough distractions to stay sane and for accommodating my erratic schedule.To my loving boyfriend, Michael Colalillo, thank you for your motivation, understanding,
encouragement, time, and patience during this time; and of course, thank you for the pasta dinners.
To all my friends, thank you for the unwavering mental support and for never doubting me.
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
4/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- iv -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................... iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................................................ivLIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................. xi
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS.....................................................................xv
CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1
1.1 Overview of Thesis................................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Wind Turbine Type, Components, and Terminology .........................................................................2
CHAPTER 2:LITERATURE REVIEW..........................................................................................4
2.1 International Standards ........................................................................................................................4
2.1.1 International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).................................................................4
2.1.2 Germanischer Lloyd (GL) ........................................................................................................5
2.1.3 Det Norske Veritas (DNV) ......................................................................................................5
2.1.4 Other European Standards.......................................................................................................7
2.2 Canadian Standards ..............................................................................................................................7
2.2.1 CAN/CSA-C61400-1:08, Wind Turbines Part 1: Design Requirements.............................. 7
2.2.2 CAN/CSA S37-01, Antennas, Towers, and Antenna-Supporting Structures..........................8
2.2.3 CAN/CSA S473-04, Steel (Fixed Offshore) Structures............................................................8
2.2.4 CAN/CSA S16-09, Design of Steel Structures .........................................................................8
2.3 Book Publications.................................................................................................................................8
2.4 Current Research on Wind Turbine Towers........................................................................................ 9
2.4.1 Comparison of Seismic Analysis Methods: Frequency-Domain vs. Time-Domain..............9
2.4.2 Shell Buckling......................................................................................................................... 10
2.4.3 Dynamic Soil-Structure Interaction Effects............................................................................11
2.5 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 12
CHAPTER 3:FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION ......................... 13
3.1 Geometry of Wind Turbine Towers.................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Finite Element Analysis Program ...................................................................................................... 13
3.3 Material Properties.............................................................................................................................. 14
3.4 Choice of Elements............................................................................................................. ................ 16
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
5/174
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- v -
3.4.1 Shell Elements ........................................................................................................................ 16
3.4.1.1 Classical Plate Theory............................................................................................ 16
3.4.2 Solid Elements........................................................................................................................ 17
3.4.2.1 Elastic Beam Theory ............................................................................................. 18
3.4.3 Solid-Shell Interaction............................................................................................................ 18
3.5 Connection Modelling ........................................................................................................................ 183.6 Tubular Members under Bending...................................................................................................... 19
3.6.1 FE Model for Pure Flexure .................................................................................................... 21
3.6.1.1 Mesh Sensitivity ..................................................................................................... 22
3.6.1.2 Refinement of Mesh...............................................................................................23
3.6.1.3 Results and Analysis of Tubular Members under Pure Flexure........................... 24
3.6.2 FE Model of a Cantilever Tower under Bending .................................................................. 27
3.6.2.1 Results and Analysis of Cantilever Tower under Bending ................................... 28
3.6.2.2 Stiffening Effect of a Flange .................................................................................. 29
3.6.2.3 Effect of Local Imperfections on Flexural Behaviour...........................................303.7 Tubular Members under Axial Compression..................................................................................... 31
3.7.1 FE Analyses for Validation of Axial Buckling Behaviour ..................................................... 32
3.7.1.1 FE Models for Validation of Axial Buckling Behaviour....................................... 32
3.7.1.2 Eigenvalue Buckling Analysis...............................................................................32
3.7.1.3 Nonlinear Buckling Analysis Geometric and Material Nonlinearities ............. 33
3.7.1.4 Geometric Imperfections for Global Buckling...................................................... 33
3.7.1.5 Geometric Imperfections for Local Buckling ....................................................... 33
3.7.1.6 Results and Analysis of Cantilever Tower under Axial Compression .................. 34
3.7.2 Summary of Modelling Decisions..........................................................................................36
3.8 Time-History Analysis under Seismic Excitation.............................................................................. 36
3.8.1 Damping in ANSYS ............................................................................................................... 37
3.8.1.1 Comparison of Effect of Damping ........................................................................ 38
3.8.1.2 Aerodynamic Damping.......................................................................................... 41
3.8.2 Incremental Nonlinear Analysis ............................................................................................ 41
3.8.2.1 Failure Mode.......................................................................................................... 42
3.9 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 43
CHAPTER 4:PRELIMINARYANALYSIS OFVESTASWINDTURBINETOWER...........................45
4.1 Structure Characteristics.....................................................................................................................45
4.1.1 Dimensions And Details ........................................................................................................ 45
4.1.1.1 Discontinuities....................................................................................................... 45
4.1.2 Mass........................................................................................................................................48
4.1.3 Mode Shapes .......................................................................................................................... 49
4.1.4 Damping.................................................................................................................................49
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
6/174
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- vi -
4.2 Finite Element Model of Vestas Wind Turbine Tower ..................................................................... 49
4.3 Pushover Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 52
4.3.1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 52
4.3.2 Pushover Analysis of Wind Turbine Tower...........................................................................53
4.3.2.1 Imposed Imperfections..........................................................................................54
4.3.3 Results of Pushover Analysis ................................................................................................. 554.3.3.1 Interpretation of Pushover Analysis Results......................................................... 57
4.4 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 57
CHAPTER 5:NONLINEARTIME-HISTORYANALYSIS OF THEVESTASWINDTURBINETOWER........................................................................................................................................58
5.1 Earthquake Suite.................................................................................................................................58
5.1.1 Earthquake Input in Time-History Analyses........................................................................62
5.1.2 Scaling of Earthquake Records..............................................................................................62
5.2 Results of LA01 & LA02 (Imperial Valley, 1940, Elcentro)................................................................ 635.2.1 Intensity and Damage Measures ........................................................................................... 63
5.2.1.1 Peak Displacement ................................................................................................ 64
5.2.1.2 Peak Rotation.........................................................................................................65
5.2.1.3 Peak Stress .............................................................................................................66
5.2.1.4 Residual Deformation............................................................................................ 67
5.2.2 Displaced Shape ..................................................................................................................... 67
5.2.3 Time-History Displacement Response ................................................................................. 69
5.2.4 Orbit Plots .............................................................................................................................. 70
5.2.5 Definition of Damage States for Wind Turbine Towers ....................................................... 72
5.2.5.1 0.2% Residual Out-of-Straightness........................................................................72
5.2.5.2 First Yield...............................................................................................................72
5.2.5.3 1.0% Residual Out-of-Straightness........................................................................72
5.2.5.4 First Buckle / Loss of Tower.................................................................................72
5.3 Summary of Results for LA Earthquake Suite ................................................................................... 73
5.3.1 Incremental Dynamic Analysis Curves..................................................................................74
5.3.1.1 Assessment of Damage Measures ......................................................................... 74
5.3.1.2 Average Damage Measures ................................................................................... 75
5.3.2 Location of Buckle for 4th Damage State...............................................................................75
5.3.3 Definition of Fragility Curves ................................................................................................ 76
5.3.4 Effect of Vertical Earthquake Component ............................................................................ 79
5.3.5 Effect of Damping..................................................................................................................80
5.3.6 Validation of Connection Modelling...................................................................................... 81
5.4 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 83
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
7/174
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- vii -
CHAPTER 6:INCREMENTALANALYSIS FORTWO CANADIAN SITES ......................................85
6.1 Eastern Canada Site............................................................................................................................85
6.1.1 Simulated Time-History Records for the Eastern Canada Site ............................................ 86
6.1.2 Earthquake Suite for the Eastern Canada Site ...................................................................... 86
6.2 Western Canada Site ........................................................................................................................... 89
6.2.1 Simulated Time-History Records for the Western Canada Site............................................896.2.2 Earthquake Suite for the Western Canada Site ..................................................................... 90
6.3 Methodology for Scaling Records for IDA.........................................................................................93
6.3.1 Efficiency of Method..............................................................................................................94
6.4 Results for Eastern Canada Site ......................................................................................................... 96
6.5 Results of Time-History Analysis for Western Canada Site .............................................................. 97
6.5.1 Incremental Dynamic Analysis Curves..................................................................................97
6.5.1.1 Average Damage Measures ................................................................................... 98
6.5.2 Fragility Curves ...................................................................................................................... 99
6.6 Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 100
CHAPTER 7:CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................101
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................... 103
APPENDIX A: RESULTS OF INCREMENTALTIME-HISTORYANALYSIS FORLA
EARTHQUAKE SUITE.................................................................................. 107
A.1 LA03 & LA04 (Imperial Valley, 1979, Array #05)............................................................................ 108
A.2 LA05 & LA06 (Imperial Valley, 1979, Array #06)............................................................................. 111
A.3 LA07 & LA08 (Landers, 1992, Barstow)...........................................................................................114
A.4 LA09 & LA10 (Landers, 1992, Yermo)..............................................................................................117
A.5 LA11 & LA12 (Loma Prieta, 1989, Gilroy) ....................................................................................... 120
A.6 LA13 & LA14 (Northridge, 1994, Newhill)...................................................................................... 123
A.7 LA15 & LA16 (Northridge, 1994, Rinaldi RS) ................................................................................. 126
A.8 LA17 & LA18 (Northridge, 1994, Sylmar)........................................................................................ 129
A.9 LA19 & LA20 (North Palm Springs, 1986) ...................................................................................... 132
A.10 IDA Curves for Investigated Intensity Measures ........................................................................... 135
APPENDIX B: SEISMIC HAZARD FORTWO CANADIAN SITES............................................ 138
APPENDIX C: RESULTS OF THEWESTERN CANADAEARTHQUAKE SUITE........................141
C.1 WCan01 (Magnitude 6, 8 13 km) .................................................................................................. 142
C.2 WCan02 (Magnitude 7, 10 26 km) ................................................................................................ 144
C.3 WCan03 (Magnitude 7, 10 26 km) ................................................................................................ 146
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
8/174
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- viii -
C.4 WCan04 (Magnitude 7, 10 26 km) ................................................................................................ 148
C.5 WCan05 (Magnitude 7, 10 26 km) ................................................................................................ 150
C.6 WCan06 (Magnitude 7, 30 100 km) .............................................................................................. 152
C.7 WCan07 (Cascadia Record, Magnitude 9, 112 201 km)................................................................ 154
C.8 Fragility Curves for Additional Intensity Measures........................................................................ 156
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
9/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- ix -
LIST OFTABLES
Table 3.1: Cross-sectional slenderness limits (D/t) of circular hollow sections in bending 20
Table 3.2: Slenderness limits (D/t) of circular hollow sections in axial compression for non-slenderbehaviour, using E = 200000 MPa 31
Table 3.3: Summary of results of time-history analyses for the UCSD tower comparing different dampingvalues 38
Table 3.4: Summary of results of incremental time-history analyses for the UCSD tower 42
Table 4.1: Mass of Vestas wind turbine tower 48
Table 5.1: Properties of LA earthquake suite records 59
Table 5.2: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA01 & LA02 (ImperialValley, 1940, Elcentro) 63
Table 5.3: Minimum, average, and maximum values of damage measures at each damage state 75
Table 5.4: Location of buckle for the LA earthquake suite 76
Table 5.5: Intensity measures (magnification factors) of each earthquake analysis and statistics for all thedamage states for the LA earthquake suite 77
Table 5.6: Properties of earthquake records for analyses that included a vertical component 79
Table 5.7: Variation of peak displacement compared to 1% damping for LA11 and LA12 (Loma Prieta,1989, Gilroy) 80
Table 5.8: Properties of bolts used in intermediate flanges of Vestas wind turbine tower 82
Table 5.9: Characteristics of wind turbine tower flanges 83
Table 6.1: Spectral hazard values (Sa(T)) and peak ground acceleration (PGA) for the Eastern Canada site,2% probability of exceedance in 50 years 85
Table 6.2: Scale factors and PGA of earthquake records chosen for the Eastern Canada site 87
Table 6.3: Spectral hazard values (Sa(T)) and peak ground acceleration (PGA) for the Western Canada site,
2% probability of exceedance in 50 years 89
Table 6.4: Scale factors and PGA of earthquake records chosen for the Western Canada site 91
Table 6.5: Summary of results of time-history analyses for the Eastern Canada suite 96
Table 6.6: Summary of results of time-history analyses for the Eastern Canada suite with magnificationfactor of 10 96
Table 6.7: Minimum, average, and maximum values of damage measures at each damage state for theWestern Canada site 99
Table 6.8: Probability of exceedance of particular damage states for varying seismic event intensities 100
Table A. 1: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA03 & LA04 (ImperialValley, 1979, Array #05) 108
Table A.2: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA05 & LA06 (ImperialValley, 1979, Array #06) 111
Table A.3: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA07 & LA08 (Landers,1992, Barstow) 114
Table A.4: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA09 & LA10 (Landers,1992, Yermo) 117
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
10/174
LIST OFTABLES
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- x -
Table A.5: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA11 & LA12 (LomaPrieta, 1989, Gilroy) 120
Table A.6: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA13 & LA14(Northridge, 1994, Newhill) 123
Table A.7: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA15 & LA16(Northridge, 1994, Rinaldi RS) 126
Table A.8: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA17 & LA18(Northridge, 1994, Sylmar) 129
Table A.9: Summary of displacement results of time-history analyses subjected to LA19 & LA20 (NorthPalm Springs, 1986) 132
Table C.1: Summary of results of time-history analyses for WCan01 142
Table C.2: Summary of results of time-history analyses for WCan02 144
Table C.3: Summary of results of time-history analyses for WCan03 146
Table C.4: Summary of results of time-history analyses for WCan04 148
Table C.5: Summary of results of time-history analyses for WCan05 150Table C.6: Summary of results of time-history analyses for WCan06 152
Table C.7: Summary of results of time-history analyses for WCan07 154
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
11/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xi -
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Typical horizontal-axis wind turbine 2
Figure 3.1: Engineering and true stress-strain curve from Voth (2010) for cold-formed circular HSS 15
Figure 3.2: Stress-strain curves used in subsequent analyses 15
Figure 3.3: Geometry of shell element used to represent tower walls (ANSYS, 2007) 16
Figure 3.4: Geometry of 20-noded solid element used to represent flanges (ANSYS, 2007) 17
Figure 3.5: Geometry of wind turbine tower ring flanges 18
Figure 3.6: Bolted flange connections of wind turbine tower (Vestas, 2006) 19
Figure 3.7: Schematic and descriptions of FE models for validation of pure flexure 21
Figure 3.8: Normalised moment-curvature response of FEA of VF-el for various mesh sizes using uniformmesh and perfect geometry/loading 22
Figure 3.9: Refined mesh configuration 23
Figure 3.10: Incorrect buckling configuration due to perfectly symmetrical model and loading 24
Figure 3.11: Normalised moment-curvature response of FE model VF-el compared with experimental resultsfrom Elchalakani et al. (2002) 25
Figure 3.12: Local buckling failure of CHS under pure bending, D/t = 111 25
Figure 3.13: Normalised moment-curvature response of FE models VF-1 and VF-el (D/t = 111) 26
Figure 3.14: Normalised moment-curvature response of FE models VF-2 (D/t = 286) 27
Figure 3.15: Local buckle failure of very slender CHS under pure bending (D/t = 286) 27
Figure 3.16: Schematic and descriptions of FE models for validation of bending behaviour 28
Figure 3.17: Normalised moment-curvature response of FE models VB-1 (D/t = 111), VB-2 (D/t = 276),and VBS-1 (stiffened) 29
Figure 3.18: Investigation of location of buckle 30
Figure 3.19: Effect of local imperfections on cantilever tower under bending 31Figure 3.20: Schematic and descriptions of FE models for validation of axial compression 32
Figure 3.21:Assessment of influence of geometric imperfections for local buckling 34
Figure 3.22:Axial loading analysis FE results of VA-1 (D/t = 111) with and without local imperfections 35
Figure 3.23:Axial loading analysis FE results of VA-2 (D/t = 286) with and without local imperfections 35
Figure 3.24: Details of small wind turbine tested at UCSD 37
Figure 3.25:Acceleration at top of nacelle for the reference earthquake for various damping ratios 39
Figure 3.26:Acceleration at upper joint for the reference earthquake for various damping ratios 40
Figure 3.27: Displacement response of incremental time-history analysis of small wind turbine 42
Figure 3.28: Buckled shape of UCSD wind turbine tower analysis at a magnification factor of 10 43Figure 4.1: Details at base of Vestas wind turbine tower 46
Figure 4.2: Wind turbine tower dimensions and layout (Vestas, 2006) 47
Figure 4.3: D/t ratio of Vestas wind turbine tower sections along the height with CSA (2009b) cross-sectionclassification in bending 48
Figure 4.4: Mode shapes of Vestas tower in horizontal direction 49
Figure 4.5: Mesh of Vestas wind turbine tower 51
Figure 4.6: Direction of pushover analyses 54
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
12/174
LIST OF FIGURES
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xii -
Figure 4.7: Multimode load pattern for pushover analysis of Vestas wind turbine tower 54
Figure 4.8: Load-displacement curves for pushover analysis at 0 for material properties with gradualyielding and with yield plateau 55
Figure 4.9: Buckled failure of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to pushover analysis at 0 56
Figure 4.10: Peak load for pushover analysis acting at various angles 56
Figure 4.11:Top displacement at peak load for pushover analysis acting at various angles 56
Figure 5.1: Elastic acceleration response spectra for earthquake suite considered 60
Figure 5.2: Elastic displacement response spectra for earthquake suite considered 60
Figure 5.3: Accelerograms of 20 scaled ground motion records of the LA earthquake suite 61
Figure 5.4: Top view of tower showing definition of angle in plan view 64
Figure 5.5: Displaced shape of wind turbine tower used to determine the peak rotation for LA01 & LA02(Imperial Valley, 1940, Elcentro) 66
Figure 5.6: Displaced shape of wind turbine tower at various magnification factors for LA01 & LA02(Imperial Valley, 1940, Elcentro) 68
Figure 5.7: Bucked shape of Vestas wind turbine tower analysis for LA01 & LA02 (Imperial Valley, 1940,Elcentro) 69
Figure 5.8: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA01 & LA02 (Imperial Valley, 1940, Elcentro) at hub height 70
Figure 5.9: Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA01 & LA02 (ImperialValley, 1940, Elcentro) 71
Figure 5.10: Incremental dynamic analysis curves for three damage measures: peak displacement, peakrotation, and residual displacement 74
Figure 5.11: Fragility curves for LA earthquake suite for magnification factor intensity measure 78
Figure 5.12: Fragility curves for LA earthquake suite for PGV intensity measure 78
Figure 5.13: Fragility curves for LA earthquake suite for PGA intensity measure 79
Figure 5.14: Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for varying damping values of wind turbine tower: 0.5%, 1.0% and
1.5% of critical 81Figure 5.15: Geometry of bolted connection of tower flange 82
Figure 6.1: 2005 NBCC UHS for the Eastern Canada site for 2% in 50 years and average spectra of 4record sets of simulated earthquakes 86
Figure 6.2: Accelerograms of 14 scaled ground motion records for the Eastern Canada site 88
Figure 6.3: Acceleration response spectra for the Eastern Canada earthquake suite for 2% in 50 yearsprobability of exceedance 89
Figure 6.4: 2005 NBCC UHS for the Western Canada site for 2% in 50 years and average spectra of 4record sets of simulated earthquakes 90
Figure 6.5: Accelerograms of 14 scaled ground motion records for the Western Canada site 92
Figure 6.6: Acceleration response spectra for the Western Canada earthquake suite for 2% in 50 yearsprobability of exceedance 93
Figure 6.7: Flowchart of scaling procedure for the Canadian earthquake suites 95
Figure 6.8: Incremental dynamic analysis curves for Western Canada suite 97
Figure 6.9: Fragility curves for Western Canada site for the magnification factor intensity measure 99
Figure A.1: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA03 & LA04 (Imperial Valley, 1979,Array #05) 108
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
13/174
LIST OF FIGURES
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xiii -
Figure A.2: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA03 & LA04 (Imperial Valley, 1979, Array #05) at hub height (80m) 109
Figure A.3: Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA03 & LA04 (ImperialValley, 1979, Array #05) 110
Figure A.4: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA05 & LA06 (Imperial Valley, 1979,Array #06) 111
Figure A.5: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA05 & LA06 (Imperial Valley, 1979, Array #06) at hub height (80m) 112
Figure A.6: Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA05 & LA06 (ImperialValley, 1979, Array #06) 113
Figure A.7: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA07 & LA08 (Landers, 1992,Barstow) 114
Figure A.8: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA07 & LA08 (Landers, 1992, Barstow) at hub height (80m) 115
Figure A.9: Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA07 & LA08 (Landers,1992, Barstow) 116
Figure A.10:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA09 & LA10 (Landers, 1992, Yermo)
117Figure A.11:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to
LA09 & LA10 (Landers, 1992, Yermo) at hub height (80m) 118
Figure A.12:Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA09 & LA10 (Landers,1992, Yermo) 119
Figure A.13:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA11 & LA12 (Loma Prieta, 1989,Gilroy) 120
Figure A.14:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA11 & LA12 (Loma Prieta, 1989, Gilroy) at hub height (80m) 121
Figure A.15:Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA11 & LA12 (LomaPrieta, 1989, Gilroy) 122
Figure A.16:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA13 & LA14 (Northridge, 1994,Newhill) 123
Figure A.17:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA13 & LA14 (Northridge, 1994, Newhill) at hub height (80m) 124
Figure A.18:Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA13 & LA14(Northridge, 1994, Newhill) 125
Figure A.19:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA15 & LA16 (Northridge, 1994,Rinaldi RS) 126
Figure A.20:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA15 & LA16 (Northridge, 1994, Rinaldi RS) at hub height (80m) 127
Figure A.21:Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA15 & LA16(Northridge, 1994, Rinaldi RS) 128
Figure A.22:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA17 & LA18 (Northridge, 1994,Sylmar) 129
Figure A.23:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA17 & LA18 (Northridge, 1994, Sylmar) at hub height (80m) 130
Figure A.24:Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA17 & LA18(Northridge, 1994, Sylmar) 131
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
14/174
LIST OF FIGURES
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xiv -
Figure A.25:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to LA19 & LA20 (North Palm Springs,1986) 132
Figure A.26:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toLA19 & LA20 (North Palm Springs, 1986) at hub height (80m) 133
Figure A.27:Orbit in x-z plane (in mm) for Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to LA19 & LA20 (NorthPalm Springs, 1986) 134
Figure A.28:IDA curves for various intensity measures and peak displacement damage measure 135Figure A.29:IDA curves for various intensity measures and residual displacement damage measure 136
Figure A.30:IDA curves for various intensity measures and peak rotation damage measure 137
Figure C.1: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to WCan01 142
Figure C.2: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toWCan01 at hub height (80m) 143
Figure C.3: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to WCan02 144
Figure C.4: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected to
WCan02 at hub height (80m) 145Figure C.5: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to WCan03 146
Figure C.6: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toWCan03 at hub height (80m) 147
Figure C.7: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to WCan04 148
Figure C.8: Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toWCan04 at hub height (80m) 149
Figure C.9: Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to WCan05 150
Figure C.10:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toWCan05 at hub height (80m) 151
Figure C.11:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to WCan06 152
Figure C.12:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toWCan06 at hub height (80m) 153
Figure C.13:Peak displaced shape of wind turbine tower subjected to WCan07 154
Figure C.14:Incremental time-history displacement response of Vestas wind turbine tower subjected toWCan07 at hub height (80m) 155
Figure C.15:Fragility curves for the Western Canada earthquake suite for PGV intensity measure 156
Figure C.16:Fragility curves for the Western Canada earthquake suite for PGA intensity measure 156
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
15/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xv -
LIST OF SYMBOLS ANDABBREVIATIONS
AISC American Institute of Steel Construction
BSI British Standards Institution
CEN European Committee for Standardization (Comit Europen de Normalisation)
CSA Canadian Standards Association
GL Germanischer Lloyd
IEC International Electrotechnical Commission
NBCC National Building Code of Canada
CHS circular hollow section
DBE design-based earthquake
DM damage measure
DOF degree-of-freedom
DS damage state
FE finite element
FEA finite element analysis
FEM finite element method
HSS hollow structural section
IDA incremental dynamic analysis
IM intensity measure
LP load pattern
MCE maximum considered earthquake when referring to the Los Angeles area
MF magnification factor
PGA peak ground acceleration
PGV peak ground velocity
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
16/174
LIST OF SYMBOLS ANDABBREVIATIONS
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xvi -
SRSS square root of the sum of the squares
SSI soil-structure interation
UHS uniform hazard spectra
A cross-sectional area
Ab nominal area of bolt
]c[ damping matrix
D outside diameter of a CHS
Dm centreline diameter of a CHS
E Youngs modulus of elasticity
I moment of inertia
Fc elastic compressive buckling stress defined based on Fyand D/t
( ))t(F dynamic load vector
Fu ultimate tensile stress
Fy yield tensile stress
Fy,eff effective yield tensile stress calculated to meet Class 3 D/t limits
g acceleration due to gravity, 9.81m/s2
h height above base
H hub height
hf height of stiffening flange from base of tower
]k[ stiffness matrix
t thickness
tf thickness of stiffening flange
Ti period of mode i
Lr length of member having refined finite element size
]m[ mass matrix
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
17/174
LIST OF SYMBOLS ANDABBREVIATIONS
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xvii -
M moment
MFDS1 magnification factor at damage state 1
Mp plastic moment of a cross-section
Mu moment at ultimate capacity
My yield moment of a cross-section
n factor used in predicting scale factors that account for nonlinearity of response
P load
Pe Euler buckling load
Pu load at ultimate capacity
S elastic section modulus
SAtarg target spectral acceleration
SAsim spectral acceleration of simulated ground motion record
se element size
Tu ultimate bolt capacity
wf width of stiffening flange
)x( nodal displacement vector
)x(& nodal velocity vector
)x(&& nodal acceleration vector
Z plastic section modulus
coefficient used in Rayleigh damping
i modal participation factor of mode i
coefficient used in Rayleigh damping
lateral deflection
max peak lateral deflection
max,avg,DS1 average peak lateral deflection for the first damage state
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
18/174
LIST OF SYMBOLS ANDABBREVIATIONS
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- xviii -
res residual lateral deflection
top lateral deflection at top of tower
true-strain; parameter used in slenderness limits
nom engineering strain
u ultimate strain at fracture
i modal damping ratio of mode i
rotation of tower as defined in Section 5.2.1.2
max maximum rotation of tower as defined in Section 5.2.1.2
plan angle of tower in plan view (or top view, or x-z plane)
curvature
p curvature at plastic moment: Mp/EI
average/mean, used in defining fragility curves
true-stress; standard deviation used in defining fragility curves
nom engineering stress
mises Von Mises stress
i mode shape of mode i, normalized to mass matrix
i circular frequency of a mode i
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
19/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 1 -
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Wind energy has gained popularity worldwide as many countries aim to increase the production
of clean energy. As Canada follows suit, Canadian design codes are largely adopting international
standards for the design of wind turbine components. However, several gaps are evident due to
Canadas unique environment. One such gap is the assessment of seismic risk pertaining to wind
turbine towers, as the major developments of wind turbines have been in non-seismic areas. The
seismic risk is of particular importance to owners of wind turbine developments, especially wind
turbine farms, since all the towers are identical. This means that a seismic event would affect all the
towers in the same manner if one fails, they all fail. Such a failure would result in severe financial
losses, as well as social implications if wind energy takes over more of the energy production in
Canada.
Thus, the need for research in this area has become evident. Wind turbine towers are differentfrom other structures because they are characterized by a very tall and slender tubular tower. This
geometry results in a structure that cannot respond in a ductile manner, thus the wind turbine
towers capacity when subjected to dynamic loads must be characterized.
1.1 OVERVIEW OFTHESISThis thesis begins with a review of existing literature on wind turbine towers, specifically
pertaining to seismic provisions and behaviour under seismic loads. International design codes for
wind turbines are presented, along with Canadian design codes for steel structures that may be
applicable to wind turbine towers. Some of the current research on seismic response of wind
turbine towers is also presented, noting that none of the existing research has evaluated the seismic
event that may cause failure of a typical wind turbine tower.
Chapter 3 describes the development and validation of a finite element model and methods
employed. Most of the validation analyses are carried out on a simple tubular member of constant
cross-section. Chapter 4 provides details of the typical wind turbine tower analysed in this thesis
and describes a preliminary analysis of the tower that was carried out using pushover analysis. The
tower was then subjected to incremental dynamic analyses, based on an earthquake suite for the Los
Angeles area in California, USA. These analyses were used to derive a methodology for determining
the seismic hazard of steel wind turbine towers. Damage states of the wind turbine tower were
defined and fragility curves were created for each damage state, indicating the probability that a
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
20/174
CHAPTER1: INTRODUCTION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 2 -
given intensity measure will cause exceedance of a particular damage state. Thus, a framework was
set up to assess the seismic hazard for wind turbine towers in any location.
The culmination of this project was the incremental dynamic analysis and seismic risk evaluation
at two Canadian locations. One location was in Western Canada, representing the most severe
seismic hazard in the country, and one was in Eastern Canada, representing a milder seismic hazard
but one where several wind farm developments are underway.
1.2 WINDTURBINETYPE,COMPONENTS, ANDTERMINOLOGYSeveral types of wind turbines exist, but the most prevalent have a horizontal-axis rotor with
three blades and are supported by a thin-walled steel tower. This type of wind turbine is depicted in
Figure 1.1 and the main components of the wind turbine are labeled.
Figure 1.1: Typical horizontal-axis wind turbine
The rotor is made up of blades that are attached to a hub. Wind turbines are often referred to
by their hub height, which represents the height from the base to the centre of the rotor. The hub
height of the wind turbine tower analysed in this thesis is 80 m, which is a typical height. The
nacelle is behind the hub, and it contains the gearbox, generator, shafts, and other machinery. The
Main Wind TurbineComponents:
Rotor
Nacelle
Tower
Foundation
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
21/174
CHAPTER1: INTRODUCTION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 3 -
tower is made of a thin-walled tubular steel monopole and the foundation for onshore wind turbines
is typically an octagonal reinforced concrete slab. As previously mentioned, this thesis focuses on
the steel tower of the wind turbine.
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
22/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 4 -
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTERNATIONAL STANDARDSSeveral standards for the design and safety requirements of wind turbines exist. The most
significant ones are discussed in this section, and particular attention is given to any seismic design
or analysis provisions.
2.1.1 INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION (IEC)The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) is the leading organization that compiles
international standards for electrical technologies. The IEC documents act as a basis for national
standardization and also as a reference for international contracts. Founded in 1906, the IEC did
not become involved in the wind turbine industry until 1988, when a technical committee, TC 88,
was formed to compile guidelines for wind turbines. This technical committee has developed theIEC 61400 series, which is comprised of 10 guidelines that cover various topics related to wind
turbine generators. The bulk of the design process for onshore wind turbines is addressed by Part 1,
Design Requirements.
Furthermore, the IEC specifies project and type certification schemes for wind turbines in the
IEC WT 01 document IEC System for Conformity Testing and Certification of Wind Turbines,
Rules and Procedures. This document refers to all of the IEC 61400 series technical standards,
while also referring to several standards from the International Organization for Standardization
(ISO) (IEC, 2001).
IEC61400-1, Wind Turbines Part 1: Design Requirements
This part of IEC61400 specifies minimum design requirements to assure the engineering
integrity of wind turbines (IEC, 2005). Wind turbine classes are defined based on the reference
wind speed and the turbulence intensity that the wind turbine is expected to experience. The primary
consideration is wind loading, for which several wind conditions are described. Other
environmental conditions are also specified, wherein earthquakes are considered as one of the
extreme other environmental conditions (IEC, 2005). The standard wind turbine classes have no
minimum earthquake requirements, but assessment of earthquake conditions is outlined in Clause
11.6. Seismic analysis may be required depending on site-specific conditions, and earthquake
assessment is not required in locations that are excluded by the local seismic codes due to weak
seismic action. In locations where seismicity may be critical, the seismic loading must be combined
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
23/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 5 -
with a specified operational loading that occurs frequently during the turbines lifetime and that is
considered to be significant enough (IEC, 2005).
IEC 61400 specifies that the seismic loading be based on the ground acceleration for a 475-year
recurrence period and that response spectrum requirements be defined by the local building codes.
The evaluation of the seismic loads may be carried out either in the frequency-domain or in the
time-domain. Furthermore, a simplified conservative approach to calculate the seismic loads is
provided in Annex C, but this approach is only recommended if the tower is the only part of the
wind turbine that will experience significant loading due to seismic action (IEC, 2005).
2.1.2 GERMANISCHERLLOYD (GL)Germanischer Lloyd (GL) is a certification organization based in Germany. They use their own
guidelines, as discussed below, in addition to the IEC standards and the German Institute for
Standardization (DIN) standards to certify wind turbines and their components. Their services are
offered worldwide.
GL Wind 2003, IV Part 1, Guideline for the Certification of Wind Turbine Towers
This guideline is used in the design and certification of wind turbines. It is largely similar to
IEC61400-1, but it also describes the design process for each component of the wind turbine
separately. This guideline outlines the national requirements of several countries: Germany,
Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and India (GL, 2003).
The earthquake requirements in this guideline are very similar to those of IEC 61400-1.
Earthquakes are included in the list of design load cases, with a few minimum load cases specified.
If there are no local regulations regarding earthquake analysis, designers are referred to Eurocode 8
or the earthquake chapter in the American Petroleum Institute (API) recommended practice
document RP 2A (GL, 2003). Similarly to IEC 61400-1, the analysis may be either carried out in the
frequency-domain or the time-domain. The minimum number of modes that must be considered is
three. For analysis carried out in the time-domain, a minimum number of six simulations must be
performed per load case.
2.1.3 DET NORSKEVERITAS (DNV)Det Norske Veritas (DNV) is an independent foundation that was established in Norway, but is
now considered an international body. DNV works with the IEC and other European standards
organizations to provide project certification, type certification, and risk management for the wind
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
24/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 6 -
turbine industry. These certification services are based on IEC WT 01. Aside from its involvement
with the IEC, the DNV develops its own standards, which are used to provide a link between
standards for wind turbines, standards for offshore structures, and several other building codes.
Several documents have been published by the DNV. The one that is most comprehensive for
onshore wind turbines is a guideline written by the DNV and Ris National Laboratory in Denmark,
Guidelines for Design of Wind Turbines (DNV and Ris, 2002). The DNV also publishes
standards, recommended practice documents, and classification notes. The DNV documents that
may be helpful in wind turbine tower design include:
DNV-OS-J101, Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures
DNV-OS-J102, Design and Manufacture of Wind Turbine Blades
DNV-OS-C101, Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures, General (LFRD Method)
DNV-OS-C201, Structural Design of Offshore Units (WSD Method)
DNV-RP-C201, Bucking Strength of Plated Structures
DNV-RP-C202, Bucking Strength of Shells
DNV-RP-C203, Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures
DNV/Ris, Guidelines for Design of Wind Turbines
These guidelines were created through the cooperation of DNV and Ris National Laboratory
to provide a unified basis for the design of wind turbines. The book provides fairly detailed
guidance on all technical items that need to be covered. It is mostly based on meeting the
requirements of the IEC, and also some Danish, Dutch, and German codes (DNV and Ris, 2002).
The earthquake requirements discussed in these guidelines are very similar to those from the
IEC. Pseudo response spectra are suggested as the method of determining the earthquake loads.
Although accelerations in one vertical and two horizontal directions generally need to be analysed,
the guideline suggests some simplifying assumptions. Since the vertical acceleration is not expectedto create much of a dynamic response, the tower may be analysed using the load created by the
maximum vertical acceleration to determine if buckling will be critical. Furthermore, the two
horizontal directions can be simplified to one horizontal direction, because the dynamic system is
fairly symmetrical. A simple model of the wind turbine is suggested as a vertical rod with a
concentrated mass on top. The mass consists of the nacelle and rotor mass and of the tower
mass (DNV and Ris, 2002). This simplified analysis could be used as a preliminary analysis for
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
25/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 7 -
designers to determine if earthquake loading might be critical and thus if a more detailed analysis is
necessary.
2.1.4 OTHEREUROPEAN STANDARDSOther European standards have been fairly harmonized with the IEC codes and thus further
discussion of these is unnecessary.
2.2 CANADIAN STANDARDSAs the number of wind turbines being constructed in Canada increases, there has been much
discussion regarding which codes are applicable to the design of Canadian wind turbine towers.
Hatch Acres (2006) carried out a code review and gap analysis for wind turbines, assessing several
aspects of design of international and Canadian codes. The seismic provisions of relevant Canadian
design codes are discussed in this section.
2.2.1 CAN/CSA-C61400-1:08,WINDTURBINESPART 1: DESIGN REQUIREMENTSThis standard is almost identical to the IEC standard of the same name, with a few Canadian
deviations. It was adopted by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) in March 2008.
Furthermore, it replaces the 1987 standard, CAN/CSA-F416:87, Wind Energy Conversion Systems
(WECS) Safety, Design, and Operation Criteria.
Canadian Modifications to IEC61400-1
The CSA-C61400-1 has introduced a few changes to make the IEC61400-1 suitable for Canada.
The main changes are due to the external conditions that the wind turbine will experience. More
severe icing and temperature conditions are acknowledged. The CSA has added several notes to the
earthquake-related clauses of the IEC, instructing designers how to obtain seismic loads, design
spectral accelerations, and seismic design data (CSA, 2008). Additionally, the National Building
Code of Canada (NBCC) is referenced in several instances, one of which is for the determination of
the seismic loads.
The CSA acknowledges that the NBCC does not address earthquake forces acting vertically, and
identifies this as a problem because wind turbines may have vibration modes with significant mass
participation factors in the vertical directions. However, the vertical component of a seismic event
is most likely not significant, but is investigated and discussed in Section 5.3.4. Furthermore, there is
a discrepancy between the recurrence period of the seismic event to be used in design. The
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
26/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 8 -
IEC61400-1, and thus the new CSA-C61400-1, suggests a 475-year recurrence period, whereas the
NBCC requires a 2500-year return period.
2.2.2 CAN/CSAS37-01,ANTENNAS,TOWERS, ANDANTENNA-SUPPORTINGSTRUCTURES
This standard applies to structural antennas and towers. It does have a few requirements
regarding the effects of earthquakes and the dynamic effects of wind, but this codes applicability to
this thesis is mostly related to determining the resistance of the tower (CSA, 2001).
2.2.3 CAN/CSAS473-04,STEEL (FIXED OFFSHORE)STRUCTURESThis is a standard that specifies the requirements for the design and fabrication of fixed steel
offshore structures, but is in the process of being replaced by an adopted ISO standard (CSA,
2009a). It acknowledges that supplementary requirements may be necessary for unusual structures,which would be the case for wind turbine towers. It is more applicable to offshore wind turbines,
although some design information is applicable to onshore wind turbine towers as well, such as the
resistance of large, fabricated slender cross-section tubes under compression and bending (CSA,
2004). It also provides significant information about fatigue details relating to tubular joints and
various connection details.
2.2.4 CAN/CSAS16-09,DESIGN OF STEEL STRUCTURESThis standard provides rules and requirements for the design, fabrication, and erection of steel
structures based on limit states design. It specifically defines steel structures as structural
members and frames, and it is apparent that it is principally intended for buildings (CSA, 2009b).
Although this standard is frequently referenced by other CSA Structural Standards, it is not very
useful for the design and analysis of wind turbine structures. The one area where it may be useful is
for fatigue design, as it provides information regarding several fatigue details that are present in wind
turbine towers.
2.3 BOOKPUBLICATIONSIn recent years, several books about wind turbines have been published, most of which are very
detailed and valuable to designers of wind turbines. However, most also have little or no mention of
the effects of earthquakes on wind turbines. A few books of note are listed here:
Wind Energy Handbook (2001), by T. Burton, D. Sharpe, N. Jenkins, E. Bossanyi
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
27/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 9 -
Wind Energy Explained Theory, Design and Application (2002), by .J.F. Manwell, J.G.
McGowan, A.L. Rogers
Wind Turbines: Fundamentals, Technologies, Application, Economics(2006), by Erich Hau
Aerodynamics of Wind Turbines(2000), by M.O.L. Hansen
2.4 CURRENT RESEARCH ONWINDTURBINETOWERSThe majority of recent publications on wind turbine towers originates from universities and
research centres, with few contributions from the private sector. Some of this research that is
related to seismic behaviour of wind turbines is presented in this section.
2.4.1 COMPARISON OF SEISMICANALYSIS METHODS: FREQUENCY-DOMAIN VS.TIME-DOMAIN
Frequency-domain methods are typically favoured in design due to their ease of implementation.
Time-domain analyses have a higher computational demand and are often used in analysis of
structures, rather than in their design. Time-domain analyses are increasingly being used in the wind
turbine industry.
Currently, several wind turbine simulation software packages exist. The purpose of such
software is to analyse wind turbines under several loading cases to determine the design loads. They
range from basic to very sophisticated and are generally proprietary to companies, which carry out
the analyses and only provide the results. The more sophisticated packages can create a full
aeroelastic model of the wind turbine, including the blades, and subject it to turbulent wind loading.
The newest addition to most of these packages is wave and current loading, as offshore turbines are
becoming commonplace (van Wingerde et al., 2006; Lddecke et al., 2008). A few companies also
recognize the need to incorporate earthquake loading into these software packages, as more wind
turbines are being erected on seismically active sites. Garrad Hassan in the UK is one such
company. Their software, GH Bladed, can apply an accelerogram (real or synthesized) to a model
along with other normal loading (Witcher, 2005). The ground motion is applied in any direction anda secondary ground motion may be applied at 90 to the first. The structural dynamics of the wind
turbine are represented using a limited-degree-of-freedom modal model, and all forces and moments
at specified locations are output, as well as torques at critical locations (Witcher, 2005).
This time-domain method was validated against the frequency-domain, which is more
commonly employed. Witcher concluded that both methods were adequate, but discrepancies arose
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
28/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 10 -
when the system damping was not close to that of the design spectra, which is typically 5%. For
operating wind turbines, the aerodynamic damping is close to 5% (Witcher, 2005), and thus both
methods yield very similar results. For turbines that are not operating, the aerodynamic damping is
much lower. Most building codes do not provide a method to correct the level of damping when
using the frequency-domain method, so the time-domain method provides an advantage over thefrequency method because the correct level of damping can be applied (Witcher, 2005). Therefore,
Witcher (2005) concluded that conducting seismic analysis in the time-domain is acceptable, and in
fact preferred, because the correct aeroelastic interaction can be modelled.
A similar investigation was carried out by Windrad Engineering GmbH and Nordex Energy
GmbH (Ritschel et al., 2003). The method of modal approximation was compared with a time-
domain approach using the simulation program Flex5. The main reason for investigating this
comparison is because they believe modal approximation is not an adequate method for obtaining
design loads, especially the rotor and nacelle loads, as modal approximation ignores any action above
the tower top (Ritschel et al., 2003). Thus, any system modes which might take into account the
interaction of the tower and the blades are not considered. The results of this investigation suggest
that the modal approach is very conservative for the lower part of the tower (Ritschel et al., 2003).
Regarding the machine loads on the nacelle and the rotor, the time-domain method predicts high
vertical forces, which are not predicted by the modal approximation method because the vertical
component is ignored (Ritschel et al., 2003).
Both the time-domain method and the frequency-domain method were deemed to be adequate.
In this thesis, the time-domain method is used as the intent is to obtain information about the
response of the wind turbine tower, rather than to obtain design loads.
2.4.2 SHELL BUCKLINGLocal bucking in the shell of the wind turbine tower using static, buckling, and seismic analyses
was investigated by Bazeos et al. (2002). They also assessed the influence of the door opening on
the overall behaviour of the tower. Furthermore, the effects of soil-structure interaction were also
investigated and are discussed in the next section.
Bazeos et al. (2002) found that the static analysis yielded positive results. The wind turbine was
subjected to pseudo-aerodynamic loads corresponding to survival conditions along with gravity load,
and the maximum stresses were found to be well below yield (Bazeos et al., 2002). The static
analysis also showed acceptable stress values throughout the tower and a maximum horizontal
deflection less than 1% of the total height, which is acceptable. The buckling analysis predicted local
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
29/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 11 -
buckling would occur at 1.33 times the static load (Bazeos et al., 2002). Lastly, seismic analyses were
carried out and the first mode was found to dominate the response to the seismic excitation, as was
expected. The maximum stresses were found to be very low for this analysis as well. Thus, Bazeos
et al. (2002) concluded that seismic analysis does not produce a critical response for this type of
structure. However, the magnitude of the design earthquake was not specified, making it difficult toassess the results of these studies.
Shell buckling was also investigated by Lavassas et al. (2003), where the design of a prototype
steel wind turbine tower was evaluated. Shell buckling was not assessed under seismic loading. It
was concluded that assessment of shell buckling according to design codes is somewhat ambiguous.
Additionally, a simplified linear model was deemed insufficient because the stress concentrations at
the base of the tower are ignored.
2.4.3 DYNAMIC SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION EFFECTSResearchers have identified the importance of analyzing the soil-structure interaction (SSI) when
assessing the seismic resistance of wind turbines. Although the wind turbine tower was identified as
the most important structural component when analyzing dynamic response (Zhao and Maisser,
2006), the interaction between the structure, the foundation, and the soil around was also considered
to be very significant (Bazeos et al., 2002; Zhao and Maisser, 2006).
Time-history analysis was used for the seismic analysis to analyse the soil-structure interaction
effects, as it is applicable to both elastic linear and non-linear analysis. A weak earthquake was used
in the analysis by Zhao and Maisser (2006). The wind speeds, also as a time-history, were used to
determine the thrust and the torque on the tower top. For these loads, Zhao and Maisser (2006)
found that the peak tower displacement was dominated by the wind forces. The inclusion of SSI
resulted in reduced fundamental frequencies of the wind turbine. Thus, it was concluded that soil-
structure interaction has a large influence on the dynamic characteristics of the wind turbine tower,
particularly in areas with flexible soil, and that this interaction should be included in dynamic analysis
of wind turbines (Zhao and Maisser, 2006). This conclusion was also reached by Bazeos et al.
(2002).
Design codes generally specify response spectra depending on the soil characteristics. Thus it
may not be necessary to include SSI effects if seismic analysis is carried out in the frequency-domain.
For time-domain analyses, the soil-structure interaction should be assessed if the wind turbine
structure is erected on flexible soil.
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
30/174
CHAPTER2: LITERATURE REVIEW
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 12 -
2.5 SUMMARYThe existing codes offer some guidelines for seismic analysis of wind turbine towers, but
generally more guidance is needed, especially for areas of high seismicity. Some private companies
have identified this need and are incorporating seismic analysis in their wind turbine analysis
software. However, most existing research is concerned with verifying that a given wind turbine can
sustain low or moderate seismic loadings without assessing the limits of the wind turbine towers
seismic capabilities. Therefore, this thesis will focus on characterizing these limits for Canadian
locations by employing the finite element method (FEM).
The following chapter describes an essential part of any project that employs FEM: the
development and validation of the finite element model.
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
31/174
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 13 -
CHAPTER 3: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION
Numerical models are useful for predicting the behaviour of complex structures or structures
with unusual loading, for which analytical methods are difficult to employ, and can be used to assess
the seismic capabilities of such structures. However, any numerical model must first be deemed
reliable. Material models, element formulations, and failure mechanisms must be verified and shown
to represent realistic behaviours.
Numerical models can be validated using a variety of methods. If experimental results are
available, those results are often used to calibrate the model. Otherwise, the validation must rely on
comparison with values calculated from various theoretical formulations. It must also be shown that
the post-peak behaviour is consistent with experimental results and that the expected failure
mechanism can be captured.
When dealing with wind turbines, very few experimental tests have been performed on the
supporting structure. The validation of any numerical study must hence be segmented, yet must
demonstrate accuracy and reliability.
3.1 GEOMETRY OFWINDTURBINETOWERSTubular steel wind turbine towers are typically very tall and slender. The particular tower that is
discussed and analysed in detail in this thesis is 78 m tall, with a centreline diameter, Dm, of
3650 mm for almost the entire bottom half of the tower. The diameter then tapers down to
2800 mm at the top. The thickness of the tower varies along the height, from 35 mm at the base to
10 mm at the top. Details of the Vestas wind turbine tower are provided in Chapter 4.
For several of the validation analyses, the model was of a simpler member having a constant
diameter and thickness, so that the theoretical closed-form solution for each analysis could be
calculated and compared to the finite element analysis (FEA) result.
3.2 FINITE ELEMENTANALYSIS PROGRAMFor this thesis, ANSYS was chosen to carry out the numerical analyses, as it offers the non-
linear capabilities that are deemed necessary to capture all the aspects of the response of the wind
turbine tower that is being studied.
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
32/174
CHAPTER3: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 14 -
3.3 MATERIAL PROPERTIESTypical steel wind turbine towers are made from flat steel plates which are rolled into cylindrical
or conical pieces, and then welded longitudinally (Danish Wind Industry Association, 2003). The
cylindrical or conical pieces are then welded together circumferentially into sections of 20 to 30 m in
height, generally a length that is easily transportable. Each of these sections has flanges at the ends,
and the sections are bolted together on site as the tower is erected. Due to this fabrication process,
the material properties of the tower are similar to cold-formed tubular members. The stress-strain
curve of the material shows a low proportional limit, followed by gradual yielding, no clear yield
plateau, and significant strain hardening.
The material properties used for the analyses in this thesis come from the average of several
coupon tests of cold-formed circular HSS sections performed by Voth (2010). No material data
from an actual wind turbine tower was available. In the ANSYS analyses herein, the true-stress ()vs. true-strain () curve has been employed. This was obtained by modifying the engineering stress-
strain curve (nom, nom), as obtained from a tensile coupon test, in the following manner:
)1ln( nom+= (Equation 3.1)
)1( nomnom += (Equation 3.2)
These equations are only valid until necking of the coupon test occurs. After that point, the
stress distribution is no longer a simple uniaxial case, but a complex triaxial case (Aronofsky, 1951).
The method used by Voth (2010) to determine the post-necking material behaviour was developed
by Matic (1985). It was refined by Martinez-Saucedo et al. (2006), who suggested that the Matic
material properties should only be used in the post-necked region of the stress-strain curve. The
finite element (FE) material properties were thus determined through an iterative process, wherein
several FE analyses of a coupon with the Matic material properties were carried out and compared
with the experimental stress-strain behaviour and rupture. The resulting true stress-true strain curve
is shown in Figure 3.1, as is the experimental stress-strain curve and the onset of necking.
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
33/174
CHAPTER3: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 15 -
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Strain (mm/mm)
Stress
(MPa)
True stress-strain curve
Engineering stress-strain curve
Figure 3.1: Engineering and true stress-strain curve from Voth (2010) for cold-formed circular HSS
For the subsequent analyses, three sets of material properties were used, shown in Figure 3.2.
The first, gradual yielding, is the aforementioned true stress-strain curve from Voth (2010). The
second, having a yield plateau, was adapted from Voth (2010) by modifications as shown in Figure
3.2. The third curve is bilinear, was obtained from Elchalakani et al. (2002), and was only employed
in a few analyses that were geometrically comparable to an experimental specimen.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4
Strain (mm/mm)
Stress
(MPa)
Gradual Yielding (from Voth, 2010)
Stress-Strain Curve with Yield Plateau
Bilinear (from Elchalakani et al., 2002)
Figure 3.2: Stress-strain curves used in subsequent analyses
E = 211449 MPaFy = 389 MPa
Fu = 833 MPau = 1.1
E = 190900 MPaFy = 408 MPaFu = 510 MPau = 0.27
Yield plateau:0.02 mm/mm
0
100
200
300
400
500
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008
E
1
after necking
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
34/174
CHAPTER3: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 16 -
3.4 CHOICE OF ELEMENTSThe elements selected for this analysis are 8-noded shell elements and 20-noded solid elements,
which are further described in the following subsections. Furthermore, mass elements and rigid link
elements were employed, and it was verified that these elements exhibit the desired behaviour.
3.4.1 SHELL ELEMENTSThe wall of the tower was represented with 8-noded shell elements (SHELL281 in ANSYS), as it
was deemed that this element could likely reflect the behaviour of the tower, essentially a thin
conical shell structure. Due to the large diameter-to-thickness ratio along the tower height, the
tower wall acts fairly independently from the rest of the tower and more like a thin shell, with
potential for local buckling. This element has six degrees-of-freedom (DOFs) at each node
translations in the x, y, and z directions, and rotations about the x, y, and z axes. A schematic of the
element and its DOFs is shown in Figure 3.3. The deformation shapes are quadratic, making this
shell element well-suited to model curved shells (ANSYS, 2007). The out-of-plane stress varies
linearly through the thickness and the transverse shear stresses are assumed to be constant through
the thickness.
Figure 3.3: Geometry of shell element used to represent tower walls (ANSYS, 2007)
Another element was also investigated (SHELL93 in ANSYS). Its geometry is identical to that
of the chosen shell element, but has fewer capabilities, albeit still adequate for modelling a tubular
tower. However, the SHELL281 element was chosen, as it has nonlinear stabilization properties,
which improves the stability of local buckling during static analyses (ANSYS, 2007). This element
was found to be more stable during transient analyses as well.
3.4.1.1 CLASSICAL PLATETHEORY
The elastic behaviour of thin plates is described by classical plate theory, also known as
Kirchhoffs plate theory. This theory has several assumptions and limitations (Szilard, 2004).
I
M
P O
L
KN
Z
Y
X
zo yo
xo
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
35/174
CHAPTER3: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 17 -
Several of the assumptions are analogous to the properties of the shell element previously described.
Classical plate theory is a small-deflection theory, so the transverse deflections are assumed to be
small. The deflection limit is considered to be 1/10th of the thickness. When the deflection exceeds
this limit, some of the assumptions are violated and the theory is no longer as reliable the
behaviour of the plate begins to be governed by membrane action, rather than plate bending action.
A simple numerical analysis showed good agreement of the shell element with the classical plate
theory. The displacements obtained from the FE analyses were slightly higher than those predicted
by classical plate theory. The difference between the FEA and classical plate theory became more
evident when material nonlinearities were included in the analysis. However, once the difference
was significant, the classical plate theory was past its small-deflection limit, which is expected
because the theory does not account for any nonlinearity.
3.4.2 SOLID ELEMENTSThe wind turbine tower has flanges at the base of the tower and at several locations along the
height of the tower, as well as at the top. These allow the tower to be more easily erected and also
stiffen the tower. The flanges were modelled using a 3-dimensional solid element that has 20 nodes
(SOLID95 in ANSYS). The geometry of this element is shown in Figure 3.4. This solid element
was chosen for two reasons: it is well suited to model curved boundaries, as it has a mid-side node;
and it is directly compatible with the shell element that was chosen. One face of the solid element
has the same nodes and node placement as the shell element, resulting in easy and clean meshing ofthe flanges. Due to the connectivity to the shell wall, each flange only has one element through the
thickness, which is also a typical feature of 20-noded solid element modelling.
Figure 3.4: Geometry of 20-noded solid element used to represent flanges (ANSYS, 2007)
M
Y
QR
K
A
O
WP
X
UB
NV
S
ZT
L
IZ
Y
X
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
36/174
CHAPTER3: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 18 -
3.4.2.1 ELASTIC BEAMTHEORY
As the main effect of the flanges is to stiffen the shell and thus prevent it from moving in the
circumferential direction, a beam analysis was carried out to evaluate the solid elements flexural
capabilities. The dimensions of the beam were similar to the width and depth of the flanges on a
wind turbine tower, and the length was about 1/6th
of the circumference of a tower having a 3 mdiameter. It was found that even a very coarse mesh captured the Von Mises stress distribution well.
Thus, one element through the thickness of the flange and two elements through the width were
deemed adequate and were used in the modelling of the flanges.
3.4.3 SOLID-SHELL INTERACTIONThere is one discrepancy between the shell and solid elements which arises from the rotational
degree of freedom that does not exist in the solid element. To ensure full connectivity between the
shell and the solid, an overlap of the two elements was used, as shown in Figure 3.5. The increased
mass due to this overlap is not significant, as the wall is quite thin.
(a) (b) (c)Figure 3.5: Geometry of wind turbine tower ring flanges
(a) dimensions(b) node locations(c) area of overlap
3.5 CONNECTION MODELLINGAs discussed in the previous section, the tower is made up of sections that are bolted together
using flanges. The flanges of the Vestas wind turbine tower are shown inFigure 3.6. The flanges
are stocky and stiff, so prying of the connection is not likely to occur. The bolted connections are
thus not modelled. However, the flanges are modelled to simulate the stiffness they lend to the
tower, but are assumed to be fully connected and monolithic. The bolt holes are not modelled, as
the bolt material almost entirely fills the bolt hole. The stiffening effect of these flanges is discussed
further in 3.6.2.2. The maximum stresses at the flange connection during seismic analysis are later
verified to ensure that the assumptions stated here are not violated (Section 5.3.6).
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
37/174
CHAPTER3: FINITE ELEMENT MODEL DEVELOPMENT ANDVALIDATION
SEISMICANALYSIS OFWINDTURBINETOWERS IN THE CANADIAN ENVIRONMENT
- 19 -
Figure 3.6: Bolted flange connections of wind turbine tower (Vestas, 2006)
3.6 TUBULARMEMBERS UNDERBENDINGFlexural member cross-sections are classified by many codes based on their cross-sectional
slenderness, which governs a sections ability to carry moment. If elements of the cross-section that
are in compression are too slender, the flexural member may not reach its global flexural capacity,
but may instead buckle locally. Many codes describe the slenderness of tubular elements in flexural
compression in terms of classes, where the limits are defined based on the diameter-to-thickness
ratio (BSI, 2000; CEN, 2005; CSA, 2009b). Other codes also base their limits on the diameter-to-
thickness ratio, but describe flexural members as compact, non-compact, or slender (AISC, 2005;
Standards Australia, 1998).
Class 1 sections, also known as compact, are capable of reaching and maintaining a plastic
moment, and can thus provide sufficient rotation for plastic design. Class 2 sections, sometimes
7/30/2019 Nuta Elena 201003 MASc Thesis
38/174
C