CFD Online Logo CFD Online URL
www.cfd-online.com
[Sponsors]
Home > Forums > General Forums > Main CFD Forum

The difference between Blade Element Method and Panel Method?

Register Blogs Community New Posts Updated Threads Search

Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By robo

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old   November 20, 2014, 07:23
Default The difference between Blade Element Method and Panel Method?
  #1
Member
 
numan
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 12
mrswordf1sh is on a distinguished road
Hi,

I am trying to design a wind turbine blade.
As for I know there are two methods to calculate the output power and Power coefficient (Cp): Blade I can't say the same about panel method (I just know that the blade is divided to panels)

The programs like XFOIL and RFOIL are using panel method. There are many people using these, but there are also many people using BEM.

What is the difference between these two?

Thanks
mrswordf1sh is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 20, 2014, 15:06
Default
  #2
Member
 
robo
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 47
Rep Power: 13
robo is on a distinguished road
A blade element momentum (BEMT) code uses relations that have been derived based on global momentum conservation along the stream tube which flows through the turbine. There are a number of simplifying assumptions used in this derivation, such as averaging the flow along annular sections. A variety of empirical formulae are applied to correct for things which have been neglected in the derivation (eg dynamic wake response, finite blade number, etc). They will always require information from either experiment or some other simulation in order to account for the blade loading, as they cannot natively predict the lift/drag performance of the blade.

Panel methods are based on a potential flow solution, which is synthesized from a variety of simple flows (eg source/sink, vortex, dipole, etc) in order to approximate the turbine blade. The assume that the flow is inviscid (which it isn't) but otherwise make less simplifications then BEMT, and can natively deal with dynamic wakes, finite blades, etc. They may not require info from experiments or other simulations, as SOME potential flow methods can natively predict the lift performance of the blade. Induced drag will be calculated natively, but viscous drag will not, and they made still need corrections/experimental data/other simulations to deal with viscous drag and stall effects.

Comparing the two, panel methods are more strictly correct in an analytical, first principles sort of way, however BEMT codes run much faster, and their answers are still good for many cases. Panel codes will give you a higher fidelity data set at the end, which you may or may not need. Panel codes can potentially run independently, which may be an advantage if you lack the foil performance data. Which one you want to use will depend on what you are actually investigating. For early-stage design work, I would recommend BEMT.
mrswordf1sh likes this.
robo is offline   Reply With Quote

Old   November 22, 2014, 11:55
Default
  #3
Member
 
numan
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 30
Rep Power: 12
mrswordf1sh is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by robo View Post
A blade element momentum (BEMT) code uses relations that have been derived based on global momentum conservation along the stream tube which flows through the turbine. There are a number of simplifying assumptions used in this derivation, such as averaging the flow along annular sections. A variety of empirical formulae are applied to correct for things which have been neglected in the derivation (eg dynamic wake response, finite blade number, etc). They will always require information from either experiment or some other simulation in order to account for the blade loading, as they cannot natively predict the lift/drag performance of the blade.

Panel methods are based on a potential flow solution, which is synthesized from a variety of simple flows (eg source/sink, vortex, dipole, etc) in order to approximate the turbine blade. The assume that the flow is inviscid (which it isn't) but otherwise make less simplifications then BEMT, and can natively deal with dynamic wakes, finite blades, etc. They may not require info from experiments or other simulations, as SOME potential flow methods can natively predict the lift performance of the blade. Induced drag will be calculated natively, but viscous drag will not, and they made still need corrections/experimental data/other simulations to deal with viscous drag and stall effects.

Comparing the two, panel methods are more strictly correct in an analytical, first principles sort of way, however BEMT codes run much faster, and their answers are still good for many cases. Panel codes will give you a higher fidelity data set at the end, which you may or may not need. Panel codes can potentially run independently, which may be an advantage if you lack the foil performance data. Which one you want to use will depend on what you are actually investigating. For early-stage design work, I would recommend BEMT.
Thank you for the great explanation robo, I appreciate it..
mrswordf1sh is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3D PANEL METHOD Paolo Lampitella Main CFD Forum 12 August 27, 2014 12:46
Please: Looking for a Panel method or vortice lattice for windmill be_inspired Main CFD Forum 10 April 1, 2009 17:53
Induced drag in panel method andre Main CFD Forum 1 March 8, 2008 11:58
help 3D panel method sam Siemens 1 June 25, 2004 15:26
Panel method problem niavarani Main CFD Forum 1 June 17, 2003 11:01


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 15:35.