NORWOOD - 10/16/2010 to 5/30/2013
LOCATION DETAILS |
Latitude: |
N 37° 59.494’ or N 37° 59’ 29.64" |
Longitude: |
W 108° 13.141’ or W 108° 13’ 8.46" |
Survey Meridian: |
Colorado, New Mexico Meridian |
Township: |
43 N |
Range: |
12 W |
Section: |
17 |
Elevation: |
9,017 ft. (2,748 m) |
Datum: |
WGS 84 |
Tower Type: |
NRG Tilt-Up |
Tower Height: |
98.4 ft (30 m) |
Vane Offset (deg): |
+326° |
Direction Basis: |
Magnetic North |
Mag. Declination: |
10° 20' E, changing by 7' W/yr |
Wind Explorer S/N: |
0663 |
Site No.: |
3788 |
CSU ALP Install Team (from left): Eric Rasbach, Laura Imbler, Kevin Gosselin, Mike Kostrzewa, Daniel Fink, Jacqueline Hess and Jan Harris (taking picture).
DATA DETAILS
October 16, 2010 to May 30, 2013:
The anemometer tower was installed on October 16, 2010 and removed on May 30, 2013. The site was located near the top of Big Baldy, on the saddle just south of the peak and about 400 feet from the high voltage transmission lines that run through the area. This site was located on a open ridge, with some scrub oak and small pines below.
All data was collected using an NRG #40 Calibrated Anemometer and NRG #200 Wind Vane mounted on a tilt-up tower located at a height of 20m. The certification for the anemometer is as follows:
NRG #40C Calibrated Anemometer |
Model No. |
1900 |
Serial No. |
179500142900 |
Calibration Date |
2/9/2010 2:05:50 p.m. |
Slope |
0.753 m/s per Hz |
Offset |
0.38 m/s |
Note: An NRG #110S temperature sensor with a radiation shield was installed at a height of 2 m.
This equipment feeds into an NRG Wind Explorer data logger. All data plugs are sent to the Colorado ALP at Colorado State University for analysis. The data plug files and text versions of these files are given below.
It is important to note that these are the raw files without any compensation for offset. It is also important to note that the temperature was not recorded during this period.
Note that the temperature sensor stopped functioning properly on April 5, 2012 until it was reconnected by a crew from Harness Energy on June 3, 2012. The data from this period was deleted so as to not impact the wind resource calculations. The sensor failed periodically until it was replaced at about 18:10 on 10/12/2012.
Using this data, an analysis of the wind resource report was developed using Windographer 3.1.3. For this data an offset of +326° was applied to the wind vane data. This data was flagged for icing in two ways:
- Any wind speed data where the wind speed was less than 0.5 m/s at a temperature less than 0°C for 2 hours or more was flagged and not included in the wind resource analysis calculations
- Any wind direction data where the wind direction varied by less than 3 degrees at a temperature less than 0°C for 2 hours or more was flagged and not included in the wind resource analysis calculations
A summary report, the combined data files (with and without the validation analysis), and the Windographer files (with and without the validation analysis) are given below:
Final Wind Resource Summary
Highlights of the final wind resource assessment for the data collected during the entire data collection campaign are shown below:
Data Properties |
Variable |
Data Set Starts: |
10/16/2010 14:40 MST |
Height above ground (m) |
30 |
Data Set Ends: |
5/30/2013 8:10 |
10-min. mean wind speed (m/s) |
5.888 |
Data Set Duration: |
31 months |
10-min median wind speed (m/s) |
4.550 |
Length of Time Step: |
10 minutes |
10-min min. wind speed (m/s) |
0.38 |
Elevation: |
9,017 ft/2,748 m |
10-min max wind speed (m/s) |
30.62 |
Mean air density (kg/m³): |
0.910 |
10-min standard deviation (m/s) |
4.468 |
Wind Power Coefficients |
Weibull k |
1.372 |
Power Density at 50m: |
350 W/m² |
Weibull c (m/s) |
6.453 |
Wind Power Class: |
3 (Fair) |
Mean power density (W/m²) |
308 |
Wind Shear Coefficients |
Mean energy content (kWh/m²/yr) |
2,702 |
Power Law Exponent: |
0.117 |
Mean turbulence intensity |
0.18 |
Surface Roughness: |
0.01 m |
Energy pattern factor |
3.329 |
Roughness Class: |
0.78 |
Total data elements |
551,076 |
Roughness Description: |
Rough Pasture |
Flagged wind speed data elements |
198 |
Flagged direction data elements |
9,930 |
Missing data elements |
8,661 |
Data recovery rate (%) |
98.4 |
Note: The wind power density and wind power class at 50m are projections of the data from 30m. A surface roughness of 0.01 meters was assumed for this projection. This is the surface roughness for a rough pasture. This value was then used this to calculate the roughness class and the power law exponent shown above. |
Vertical Wind Shear, Height (m) vs Mean Wind Speed (m/s)
|
Wind Energy Rose at 30 meters
|
Wind Frequency Rose at 30 meters
|
Daily Wind Speed Profile, Hourly Mean Wind Speed at 30 meters (m/s) vs. Hour of the Day
|
Seasonal Wind Speed Profile, Monthly Mean Wind Speed at 30 meters (m/s) vs. Month
|
Probability Distribution Function at 30 meters: Frequency (%) vs. Wind Speed (m/s) |
Windographer was used to match up the wind at this site with the performance curves of some common turbines of various sizes and various heights. The table below shows the results. For the larger turbines, the tower height was increased to account for the larger turbine blades - the wind resource was extrapolated to these higher heights. Keep in mind that the larger and the higher the turbine, the better the wind and the greater the output. But of course, as the tower heights and turbine sizes increase so does the cost.
Keep in mind too that listing a particular turbine doesn't imply an endorsement - not does it imply that installing a particular turbine model is feasible or recommended for a particular site. For consistency, the larger turbines are included even at sites that where they may not be practical so that one can compare the relative production of different sites.
Turbine |
Rotor
Diameter
meters |
Rotor
Power
kW |
Hub
Height
meters |
Hub
Height
Wind
Speed
m/s |
Time
At
Zero
Output
percent |
Time
At
Rated
Output
percent |
Average
Net
Power
Output
kW |
Average
Net
Energy
Output
kWh/yr |
Average
Net
Capacity
Factor
% |
Northern Power 100-21 - 121 ft tower (37m) |
21 |
100 |
37 |
6.04 |
15.1 |
0.0 |
19.1 |
167,300 |
19.1 |
Vestas V100 - 2.6 MW - 246 ft tower (75m) |
70.5 |
2,600 |
75 |
6.56 |
27.4 |
4.9 |
653.0 |
5,720,500 |
25.1 |
GE 1.5-77 - 262 ft tower (80m) |
82.5 |
1,500 |
80 |
6.61 |
28.3 |
7.0 |
393.5 |
3,447,400 |
26.2 |
Vestas V90 - 1.8 MW 60 Hz - 262 ft tower (80m) |
100 |
1,815 |
80 |
6.61 |
42.4 |
11.3 |
472.8 |
4,141,700 |
26.1 |
Vestas V100 - 1.8 MW 60Hz - 262 ft tower (80m) |
90 |
1,815 |
80 |
6.61 |
22.6 |
12.2 |
543.7 |
4,762,500 |
30.0 |
Vestas V100 - 2.0 MW - 262 ft tower (80m) |
90 |
2,000 |
80 |
6.61 |
28.0 |
3.6 |
563.7 |
4,937,800 |
28.2 |
Vestas V112 - 3.0 MW - 276 ft tower (84m) |
90 |
3,075 |
84 |
6.64 |
27.8 |
9.1 |
849.0 |
7,437,400 |
27.6 |
GE 2.5-100 - 279 ft tower (85m) |
90 |
2,500 |
85 |
6.65 |
27.9 |
11.5 |
697.8 |
6,112,600 |
27.9 |
Siemens SWT-3.6-120 - 296 ft tower (90m) |
100 |
3,600 |
90 |
6.70 |
27.8 |
0.0 |
825.3 |
7,229,400 |
22.9 |
IMPORTANT: No turbine losses are included in the power, energy, and capacity factor values in the table. Typically, turbine losses can be 5-20% to account for maintenance downtime, icing/soiling and losses from other turbines in a wind farm. Users wanting to be conservative in the performance projections should multiply the power, energy, and capacity values by (1- % losses) to account for these losses.
|