Mooring Damage Identification of Floating Wind Turbine Using a Non-Probabilistic Approach Under Different Environmental Conditions

Abstract

This paper discusses the damage identification in the mooring line system of a floating wind turbine (FWT) exposed to various environmental loads. The proposed method incorporates a non-probabilistic method into artificial neural networks (ANNs). The non-probabilistic method is used to overcome the problem of uncertainties. For this purpose, the interval analysis method is used to calculate the lower and upper bounds of ANNs input data. This data contains some of the natural frequencies utilized to train two different ANNs and predict the output data which is the interval bounds of mooring line stiffness. Additionally, in order to reduce computational time and more importantly, identify damage in various conditions, the proposed method is trained using constant loads (CL) case (deterministic loads, including constant wind speed and airy wave model) and is tested using random loads (RL) case (including Kaimal wind model and JONSWAP wave theory). The superiority of this method is assessed by applying the deterministic method for damage identification. The results demonstrate that the proposed non-probabilistic method identifies the location and severity of damage more accurately compared to a deterministic one. This superiority is getting more remarkable as the difference in uncertainty levels between training and testing data is increasing.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11

References

  1. Andersen LV, Vahdatirad MJ, Sichani MT, Sørensen JD (2012) Natural frequencies of wind turbines on monopile foundations in clayey soils-a probabilistic approach. Comput Geotech 43:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2012.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Asgharnia A, Jamali A, Shahnazi R, Maheri A (2020) Load mitigation of a class of 5-MW wind turbine with RBF neural network based fractional-order PID controller. ISA Trans 96:272–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isatra.2019.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Avendaño-Valencia LD, Fassois SD (2017) Damage/fault diagnosis in an operating wind turbine under uncertainty via a vibration response Gaussian mixture random coefficient model based framework. Mech Syst Signal Process 91:326–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2016.11.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bae YH, Kim MH (2015) The dynamic coupling effects of a MUFOWT (multiple unit floating offshore wind turbine) with partially broken blade. Wind Energy 2(2):89–97. https://doi.org/10.17736/jowe.2015.mkr01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bae YH, Kim MH, Kim HC (2017) Performance changes of a floating offshore wind turbine with broken mooring line. Renew Energy 101:364–375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.08.044

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bakhary N, Hao H, Deeks AJ (2007) Damage detection using artificial neural network with consideration of uncertainties. Eng Struct 29(11):2806–2815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.01.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bi R, Zhou C, Hepburn DM (2017) Detection and classification of faults in pitch-regulated wind turbine generators using normal behaviour models based on performance curves. Renew Energy 105:674–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.12.075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Blanke M, Fang S, Galeazzi R, Leira BJ (2012) Statistical change detection for diagnosis of buoyancy element defects on moored floating vessels. IFAC Proc 45(20):462–467. https://doi.org/10.3182/20120829-3-MX-2028.00224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carswell W, Arwade SR, DeGroot DJ, Lackner MA (2015) Soil-structure reliability of offshore wind turbine monopile foundations. Wind Energy 18(3):483–498. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ciang CC, Lee J-R, Bang H-J (2008) Structural health monitoring for a wind turbine system: a review of damage detection methods. Meas Sci Technol 19(12):122001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/19/12/122001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dyrbye C, Hansen SO (1997) John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, USA

  12. Etemaddar M, Blanke M, Gao Z, Moan T (2016) Response analysis and comparison of a spar-type floating offshore wind turbine and an onshore wind turbine under blade pitch controller faults. Wind Energy 19(1):35–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ettefagh MM, Sadeghi MH (2008) Health monitoring of time-varying stochastic structures by latent components and fuzzy expert system. Earthq Eng Eng Vib 7(1):91–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11803-008-0785-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Faber MH (2005) On the treatment of uncertainties and probabilities in engineering decision analysis. J Offshore Mech Arct Eng 127(3):243–248. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1951776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fang S, Blanke M (2011) Fault monitoring and fault recovery control for position-moored vessels. Int J Appl Math Comput Sci 21(3):467–478. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10006-011-0035-9

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Haldar S, Sharma J, Basu D (2018) Probabilistic analysis of monopile-supported offshore wind turbine in clay. Soil Dyn Earthq Eng 105:171–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.11.028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hassani V, Sørensen AJ, Pascoal AM, Athans M (2017) Robust dynamic positioning of offshore vessels using mixed-μ synthesis modeling, design, and practice. Ocean Eng 129:389–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2016.10.041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Horn JT, Krokstad JR, Leira BJ (2019) Impact of model uncertainties on the fatigue reliability of offshore wind turbines. Mar Struct 64:174–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2018.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hsu Y, Wu WF, Chang YC (2014) Reliability analysis of wind turbine towers. Procedia Engineering. Elsevier Ltd, In, pp 218–224

    Google Scholar 

  20. IEC 61400-3 (2009) Wind turbines-Part 3: Design requirements for offshore wind turbines. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), London, UK

  21. Jahangiri V, Ettefagh MM (2018) Multibody dynamics of a floating wind turbine considering the flexibility between nacelle and tower. Int J Struct Stab Dyn 18(06):1850085. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219455418500852

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jamalkia A, Ettefagh MM, Mojtahedi A (2016) Damage detection of TLP and spar floating wind turbine using dynamic response of the structure. Ocean Eng 125:191–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2016.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jiang Z, Karimirad M, Moan T (2014) Dynamic response analysis of wind turbines under blade pitch system fault, grid loss, and shutdown events. Wind Energy 17(9):1385–1409. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Johannessen K, Meling TS, Haver S (2002) Joint distribution for wind and waves in the Northern North Sea. Int J Offshore Polar Eng 12(1):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jonkman JM (2007) Dynamics modeling and loads analysis of an offshore floating wind turbine. National Renewable Energy Lab, United States, Technical Report No. NREL/TP-500-41958 68

  26. Kim HJ, Jang BS, Park CK, Bae YH (2018) Fatigue analysis of floating wind turbine support structure applying modified stress transfer function by artificial neural network. Ocean Eng 149:113–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.12.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee JJ, Lee JW, Yi JH, Yun CB, Jung HY (2005) Neural networks-based damage detection for bridges considering errors in baseline finite element models. J Sound Vib 280(3–5):555–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2004.01.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Li CB, Choung J, Noh MH (2018) Wide-banded fatigue damage evaluation of catenary mooring lines using various Artificial Neural Networks models. Mar Struct 60:186–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marstruc.2018.03.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lyn Dee G, Bakhary N, Abdul Rahman A, Hisham Ahmad B (2010) A comparison of artificial neural network learning algorithms for vibration-based damage detection. Adv Mater Res 163–167:2756–2760. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.163-167.2756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Malik H, Mishra S (2015) Application of probabilistic neural network in fault diagnosis of wind turbine using FAST, TurbSim and Simulink. Procedia Computer Science 58:186–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.08.052

  31. Mardfekri M, Gardoni P (2015) Multi-hazard reliability assessment of offshore wind turbines. Wind Energy 18(8):1433–1450. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.1768

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Marugán AP, Márquez FPG, Perez JMP, Ruiz-Hernández D (2018) A survey of artificial neural network in wind energy systems. Appl. Energy 228:1822–1836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Matha D (2010) Model development and loads analysis of an offshore wind turbine on a tension leg platform with a comparison to other floating turbine concepts. National Renewable Energy Lab, United States, Subcontract Report No. NREL/SR-500-45891

  34. Negro V, López-Gutiérrez JS, Esteban MD, Matutano C (2014) Uncertainties in the design of support structures and foundations for offshore wind turbines. Renew Energy 63:125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2013.08.041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Padil KH, Bakhary N, Hao H (2017) The use of a non-probabilistic artificial neural network to consider uncertainties in vibration-based-damage detection. Mech Syst Signal Process 83:194–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2016.06.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Paté-Cornell ME (1996) Uncertainties in risk analysis: six levels of treatment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 54(2–3):95–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(96)00067-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Prechelt L (1998) Automatic early stopping using cross validation: quantifying the criteria. Neural Networks 11(4):761–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-6080(98)00010-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Qiu B, Lu Y, Sun L, Qu X, Xue Y, Tong F (2020) Research on the damage prediction method of offshore wind turbine tower structure based on improved neural network. Meas J Int Meas Confed 151:107141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.107141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Raed K, Teixeira AP, Guedes Soares C (2020) Uncertainty assessment for the extreme hydrodynamic responses of a wind turbine semi-submersible platform using different environmental contour approaches. Ocean Eng 195:106719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ren Z, Skjetne R, Hassani V (2015) Supervisory control of line breakage for thruster-assisted position mooring system. IFAC-PapersOnLine 48(16):235–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IFACOL.2015.10.286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Rezaniaiee Aqdam H, Ettefagh MM, Hassannejad R (2018) Health monitoring of mooring lines in floating structures using artificial neural networks. Ocean Eng 164:284–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2018.06.056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sessarego M, Feng J, Ramos-García N, Horcas SG (2020) Design optimization of a curved wind turbine blade using neural networks and an aero-elastic vortex method under turbulent inflow. Renew Energy 146:1524–1535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.07.046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Slot RMM, Sørensen JD, Sudret B, Svenningsen L, Thøgersen ML (2020) Surrogate model uncertainty in wind turbine reliability assessment. Renew Energy 151:1150–1162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.11.101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Sørensen JD, Toft HS (2010) Probabilistic design of wind turbines. Energies 3(2):241–257. https://doi.org/10.3390/en3020241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Tavner P (2012) Offshore wind turbines: reliability, availability and maintenance. The Institution of Engineering and Technology, London, UK

  46. Uzunoglu E, Guedes Soares C (2018) On the model uncertainty of wave induced platform motions and mooring loads of a semisubmersible based wind turbine. Ocean Eng 148:277–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2017.11.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Vahdatirad MJ, Andersen LV, Ibsen LB, Clausen J, Sørensen JD (2013) Probabilistic three-dimensional model of an offshore monopile foundation: reliability based approach. 2013 Seventh International Conference on Case Stories in Geotechnical Engineering and Symposium in Honor of Clyde Baker. Missouri University of Science and Technology, Illinois, pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  48. Velarde J, Vanem E, Kramhøft C, Sørensen JD (2019) Probabilistic analysis of offshore wind turbines under extreme resonant response: application of environmental contour method. Appl Ocean Res 93:101947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apor.2019.101947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wang L, Sweetman B (2012) Simulation of large-amplitude motion of floating wind turbines using conservation of momentum. Ocean Eng 42:155–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OCEANENG.2011.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wang X, Qiu Z, Elishakoff I (2008) Non-probabilistic set-theoretic model for structural safety measure. Acta Mech 198(1–2):51–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-007-0518-9

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Wang X, Xia Y, Zhou X, Yang C (2014) Structural damage measure index based on non-probabilistic reliability model. J Sound Vib 333(5):1344–1355. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JSV.2013.10.019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Wen H, Sang S, Qiu C, Du X, Zhu X, Shi Q (2019) A new optimization method of wind turbine airfoil performance based on Bessel equation and GABP artificial neural network. Energy 187:116106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Yang H, Zhu Y, Lu Q, Zhang J (2015) Dynamic reliability based design optimization of the tripod sub-structure of offshore wind turbines. Renew Energy 78:16–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.12.061

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mir Mohammad Ettefagh.

Additional information

Article Highlights

• A non-probabilistic approach is proposed to identify damage in the mooring line system of a floating wind turbine;

• The proposed method incorporates a non-probabilistic method into artificial neural network;

• The method is trained using constant loads and is tested using random loads.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hajinezhad Dehkharghani, P., Ettefagh, M.M. & Hassannejad, R. Mooring Damage Identification of Floating Wind Turbine Using a Non-Probabilistic Approach Under Different Environmental Conditions. J. Marine. Sci. Appl. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11804-020-00187-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Damage identification
  • Floating wind turbine
  • Artificial neural networks
  • Non-probabilistic method
  • Uncertainties