The data I modeled did not match the data provided

[ZHaaaAO]

Dear Professor： I modeled and calculated the results in Precomp according to the data of Spanwise position and lay-up structure .ect provided in 'documents/ IEA-15-240-RWT_Tabular '. But when I compared the results with the stiffness data in 'OpenFAST/ IEA-15-240-RWT/IEA-15-240-RWT_beamdyn_BLADE.dat ', I found that the key data were correct, but the overall trend of my results was abnormal. Is the data you provided actually calculated?If so, what is the approach?

What's more, as shown in Figure 1, the orange dots represent the supplied values, the blue dots represent the results of my calculations, and the blue lines represent my fitted polynomial curves. For example, the value of the data I calculated (blue points) will change dramatically at the conversion of sectional layup types.And the chord length increases at the span of 0.02-0.24, while the layup structure at this section does not change, which is 'SNL-FFA-W3-500', so the stiffness should show an upward trend like the blue points shows,am i right?

Interestingly, the total weight of the blade calculated by me is 70 tons, which is not much different from the 68.4 tons in the provided report. When I deleted part of the section position for fitting (black curve，seeing in figure 2), I found it was similar to the curve provided in the report (red curve).

That's why I raised the above question.Looking forward to your reply，thank you！

[ZHaaaAO]

Dear @ptrbortolotti ：

I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to bring to your attention an error that I discovered in the previous modeling work. It appears that I overlooked the continuity of changes between the different sections. I apologize for this oversight.

Now, in order to rectify this error, I need to obtain the data of the layup material at different sections for input in Precomp. However, upon reviewing the report, I noticed that it only provides material data at a few specific locations, such as 24.517% span and 77% span. Unfortunately, it does not provide data for all the required locations.

I was wondering if there is any way to obtain the material data for all the sections in order to ensure accurate modeling and analysis. Your guidance and assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best regards, @ZHaaaAO

[ptrbortolotti]

hello @ZHaaaAO , my apologies for not replying earlier, I missed this notification among my emails. let me see if I understand your request. are you looking for cross sectional geometries and material properties? if so, these are specified in this .yaml file https://github.com/IEAWindTask37/IEA-15-240-RWT/blob/master/WT_Ontology/IEA-15-240-RWT.yaml following the windIO convention, which is documented here https://windio.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ the yaml file is read into https://github.com/WISDEM/WISDEM, which calls the PreComp 2D cross sectional solver. if you feel like, you can compile WISDEM and run example 02, which will run the IEA-15 turbine here https://github.com/WISDEM/WISDEM/tree/master/examples/02_reference_turbines Note that PreComp generates the 4x4 stiffness matrix, whereas BeamDyn requires the 6x6 matrix. To generate the BeamDyn file, we ran this model https://github.com/ptrbortolotti/SONATA/tree/master. example https://github.com/ptrbortolotti/SONATA/tree/master/examples/1_IEA15MW runs the IEA15 I hope this helps

[ZHaaaAO]

Dear @ptrbortolotti Thank you so much for providing this information! I greatly appreciate it, as it has resolved my question. I'm glad to know where I can find the cross-sectional geometries and material properties in the specified .yaml file following the windIO convention. The documentation you shared will be very helpful.

I also want to express my gratitude for guiding me to the WISDEM repository, where I can compile and run the example with the IEA-15 turbine.

Thank you for your assistance！I will proceed with the instructions provided.

[rngrose]

Dear @ptrbortolotti

When I extract the material information from "IEA-15-240-RWT_tabular.xlsx" and "IEA-15-240-RWT.yaml" and use it into "materials.inp" of Precomp, I find some differences that confuse me.

In "IEA-15-240-RWT_tabular.xlsx", the shear module data is provided in the format of "G_1,G_2,G_3", the poisson ratio data is provided in the format of "Nu_1,Nu_2,Nu_3". (In the .yaml file, the data is provided in the same matrix format.)

But in the input file "materials.inp" of Precomp, the required data is "G_12,Nu_12".

I have looked up some book about composite materials rapidly, but I haven't found clear conversion relationship between "G_1,G_2,G_3,Nu_1,Nu_2,Nu_3" and "G_12,Nu_12". I also consult the reference mentioned in "IEA-15-240-RWT_tabular.xlsx", which is "MSU composites database 3D property tests, Engineering Mechanics of Composite Materials, Daniel, I & Ishai, O., 1994, pg. 34", but I can't find some useful guidelines.

I know the material data is so important in the cross-sectional structural modeling and mechanical analysis, so I want to know how to obtain exact PreComp-needed material data based on the "IEA-15-240-RWT_tabular.xlsx" or "IEA-15-240-RWT.yaml"

Sincerely hope for your reply.

[gbarter]

I think this is a copy-paste error in the header of the Excel file. G and nu are properties of shear, which by definition is across two principal dimensions. So, where it says G_1, it should be G_12 and same with nu. The order listed is G_12, G_13, G_23. I will fix that in the scripts that generate that table.

[rngrose]

I think this is a copy-paste error in the header of the Excel file. and are properties of shear, which by definition is across two principal dimensions. So, where it says , it should be and same with . The order listed is G_12, G_13, G_23. I will fix that in the scripts that generate that table.G``nu``G_1``G_12``nu

Thank you sooooo much!! Your reply is important for me.

Best wishes Wu