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

• Two high-fidelity CFD models for floating offshore platform simulation are compared. • OpenFOAM model, with refined mesh, improves the representation of viscous effects. • The turbulence model in XFlow shows better damping performance. • CFD models are validated with an error of 3.3 % in natural period and 1.6 % in damping. • A mooring system implemented in XFlow has been validated against quasi-static model. 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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ocean Engineering
Published
2025-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2025.121385
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Fluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.67
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

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

Alexia Torres, J. León, Javier Armañanzas Goñi, Beatriz Méndez et al.
2 citations
Ocean Engineering
Fluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
2.67
article

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

Alexia Torres, J. León, Javier Armañanzas Goñi, Beatriz Méndez, Guillén Campaña-Alonso, Juan Pablo Fuertes, Miguel Gil
article en
2 citations

Abstract

• Two high-fidelity CFD models for floating offshore platform simulation are compared. • OpenFOAM model, with refined mesh, improves the representation of viscous effects. • The turbulence model in XFlow shows better damping performance. • CFD models are validated with an error of 3.3 % in natural period and 1.6 % in damping. • A mooring system implemented in XFlow has been validated against quasi-static model. 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.

Ocean EngineeringVol. 331
Universidad Pública de Navarra (UPNA) (ES), National Renewable Energy Centre (ES), Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (ES)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Fluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
2.67
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.