{rfName}
Hi

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

Altmetrics

Grant support

The authors acknowledge the support given by the Government of Navarre (Research project: PC042-043 COSTA) .

Analysis of institutional authors

Campana, GuillenAuthor

Share

Publications
>
Article

High fidelity CFD models comparison to potential flow method in the simulation of full scale floating platform under free decay tests

Publicated to:Ocean Engineering. 331 121385- - 2025-07-01 331(), DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.121385

Authors: Gil, Miguel; Armananzas, Javier; Torres, Alexia; Fuertes, Juan Pablo; Campana, Guillen; Mendez, Beatriz; Leon, Javier

Affiliations

Natl Renewable Energy Ctr CENER, Wind Energy Dept, Sarriguren, Spain - Author
Publ Univ Navarre UPNA, Dept Engn, Campus Arrosadia, Pamplona 31006, Spain - Author
Publ Univ Navarre UPNA, Inst Smart Cities ISC, Campus Arrosadia, Pamplona 31006, Spain - Author
Univ Politecn Madrid, Escuela Tecn Super Ingn Aerosp, Madrid, Spain - Author

Abstract

The use of simulation models based on potential flow is widespread in the wind industry for the simulation of floating wind turbines. However, these analytical models have shortcomings in correctly representing the behavior of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines (FOWTs) under extreme wind and wave conditions. High fidelity Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations aim to develop models where the fluid-structure interaction is more accurately modeled, allowing to correctly predict the behavior of wind turbines and thus to redesign structural components and save costs. In this paper, two different CFD simulation models are developed and compared, including different turbulence models (Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) and Large Eddy Simulation (LES)), numerical methodologies (Navier-Stokes and Lattice-Boltzmann method) and mooring models (Quasi-Static and Dynamic). Different free decay Load Cases (LC) are performed in XFlow and OpenFOAM, and the damping ratio and natural period of the system are analyzed with different mooring arrangements (Multi-Point Mooring (MPM) and Single-Point Mooring (SPM)), comparing all results with respect to a potential flow model (HydroDyn). A maximum error of 3.3 % in natural period and 1.6% error in damping factor is obtained, small enough to validate the results of CFD models. Vorticity is also analyzed to understand the differences between both CFD models. Finally, the stress of the mooring lines is computed, which allows validating the mooring system model implemented in XFlow by means of external functions.

Keywords

CfdFowtHydrodyLattice boltzmannLoadOpenfoamPoint-mooring systemValidationWind turbinesXflow

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Ocean Engineering due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2025, it was in position 22/182, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Engineering, Civil.