In many analyses of composite wind turbine blades, the effects of mean stress on the determination of damage are either ignored completely or they are characterized inadequately. An updated Goodman diagram for the fiberglass materials that are typically used in wind turbine blades has been released recently. This diagram, which is based on the MSU/DOE Fatigue Database, contains detailed information at thirteen R-values. This diagram is the most detailed to date, and it includes several loading conditions that have been poorly represented in earlier studies. This formulation allows the effects of mean stress on damage calculations to be evaluated. The evaluation presented here uses four formulations for the S-N behavior of the fiberglass. In the first analysis, the S-N curve for the composite is assumed to be independent of mean stress and to have a constant slope. The second is a linear Goodman diagram, the third is a bi-linear Goodman diagram and the fourth is the full Goodman diagram. Two sets of load spectra, obtained by the LIST (Long term Inflow and Structural Test) program, are used for this evaluation. The results of the analyses, equivalent fatigue loads and damage predictions, are compared to one another. These results illustrate a significant overestimation of the equivalent fatigue loads when the mean stress is not considered in the calculation. And, the results from the updated Goodman diagram illustrate that there are significant differences in accumulated damage when the Goodman diagram includes information on the transition between compressive and tensile failure modes.

Issue Section:
Technical Papers
Keywords:
wind turbines, stress effects, fibre reinforced composites, fatigue
Topics:
Fatigue, Stress, Damage, Turbines, Spectra (Spectroscopy), Blades
1.
Sutherland, H. J., 1999, On the Fatigue Analysis of Wind Turbines, SAND99-0089, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, 132 p.
2.
van Delft, D. R. V., de Winkel, G. D., and Joosse, P. A., “Fatigue Behavior of Fiberglass Wind Turbine Blade Material Under Variable Amplitude Loading,” 1997 ASME Wind Energy Symposium, AIAA/ASME, pp. 180–188.
3.
Nijssen, R. P. L., van Delft, D. R. V., and van Wingerde, A. M., 2002 ASME Wind Energy Symposium, AIAA/ASME, pp. 10–18.
4.
Mandell, J. F., Samborsky, D. D., Wahl, N. K., and Sutherland, H. J., Testing and Analysis of Low Cost Composite Materials Under Spectrum Loading and High Cycle Fatigue Conditions, Conference Paper, ICCM14, Paper # 1811, SME/ASC p. 10.
5.
Mandell, J. F., and Samborsky, D. D., 1997, DOE/MSU Composite Material Fatigue Database: Test Methods, Materials, and Analysis, SAND97-3002, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM.
6.
Mandell, J. F., Samborsky, D. D., and Cairns, D. S., 2002, Fatigue of Composite Material and Substructures for Turbine Blades, SAND2002-077, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM.
7.
Sutherland, H. J., Jones, P. L., and Neal, B., 2001, “The Long-Term Inflow and Structural Test Program,” 2001 ASME Wind Energy Symposium, AIAA/ASME, pp. 162–172.
8.
Sutherland
,
H. J.
,
2002
, “
Analysis of the Structural and Inflow Data from the LIST Turbine
,”
J. Sol. Energy Eng.
,
124
(
2
), pp.
432
–
445
.
9.
Mandell, J. F., Samborsky, D. D., Combs, D. W., Scott, M. E., and Cairns, D. S., 1998, Fatigue of Composite Material Beam Elements Representative of Wind Turbine Blade Substructure, NREL/SR-500-24379, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Co.
10.
Sutherland, H. J., Zayas, J. R., Sterns, A. J., and Neal, B., 2004, “Update of the Long-Term Inflow and Structural Test Program,” 2001 ASME Wind Energy Symposium, AIAA/ASME, in publication.
11.
Kelley, N., Hand, M., Larwood, S., and McKenna, E., 2002, “The NREL Large-Scale Turbine Inflow and Response Experiment—Preliminary Results,” 2002 ASME Wind Energy Symposium, AIAA/ASME, pp. 412–426.
12.
Sutherland, H. J., Kelley, N. D., and Hand, M. M., “Inflow and Fatigue Response of the NWTC Advanced Research Turbine,” 2003 ASME Wind Energy Symposium, AIAA/ASME, 2003, pp. 214–224.
13.
Jackon, K., Dynamic Design, Davis, CA and M. Zuteck, MDZ Consulting, Clear Lake Shores, TX, personal communication.
14.
Malcolm, D., GEC, Kirkland, WA, personal communication.
15.
Buhl, M. L., Jr., 2001, CRUNCH User’s Guide, Ver. 2.61, NREL/NWTC, Golden, CO., 11 p.
16.
Musial, W., Clark, M., Egging, N., and Zuteck, M., 1997, “A Comparison of Strength and Load-Based Methods for Testing Wind Turbine Blades,” 1997 ASME Wind Energy Symposium, AIAA/ASME, W. Musial and D. E. Berg, eds., p. 228.
Copyright © 2004
 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.