Mesh-Free Analysis of a Vertical Axis Wind Turbine Using Lattice Boltzmann Method and Various Turbulence Models
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Title: Mesh free analysis of a vertical axis wind turbine using Lattice 2 Boltzmann Method and various turbulence models
0) ABSTRACT
0.a Please state clearly the objective/central problem of the paper.
1) INTRODUCTION
1.a As mentioned for the abstract, the objective/central problem of the paper must me stated clearly. In addition, the problems related to the prediction of power and torque coefficient must be reviewed considering previous results presented in the literature and the traditional CFD techniques. Why is LBM suposed to enhance the quality of the numerical results in comparison with other techniques?
2) NUMERICAL METHODOLOGY
No comments.
3) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.a I miss a comparison of your results for LBM technique with results obtained for a similar case based on traditional CFD techniques. If I comprehend correctly your argument, it seems that you compare your results internally only. I think the robustness of your approach could be explored with a broader comparison in terms of numerical techniques.
3.b Your collection of experimental data used in the paper is not clear. How could one reproduce your results and analysis? All used/generated data must be provided to the reader. You can use Github or Zenodo platform to make the files available.
4) CONCLUSION
4.a You mention that "the power performance of the VAWT increases as the TSR rises, particularly at low TSRs. However, at high TSRs, the interaction between vortices and blades becomes more prominent and significantly influences the blade's performance." I think your results presented in the Section 3 do not explore the previous sentence clearly. Could you explain in more detail how you find this conclusion with your results? I suppose an addtional plot must be used in the Section 3.
5) REFERENCES
5.a I think the references must be updated with more recent results. The latest one is from 2016. I think unprobable the absense of other related papers since then.
6) OVERALL
The paper presents a good theoretical work related to the application of the LBM method to investigate wind turbines. There are some missing information which could be easily complemented by the authors in order to accept the paper to be published.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to you for your time and effort in reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered your comments and have made responses and revisions accordingly. All the changes and added revisions have been highlighted in the manuscript. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback.
ABSTRACT
0.a Please state clearly the objective/central problem of the paper.
The abstract was improved in terms of objectivity and problem definition
1) INTRODUCTION
1.a As mentioned for the abstract, the objective/central problem of the paper must me stated clearly. In addition, the problems related to the prediction of power and torque coefficient must be reviewed considering previous results presented in the literature and the traditional CFD techniques. Why is LBM suposed to enhance the quality of the numerical results in comparison with other techniques?
The following references which includes the advantages of LBM over the traditional methods are added to the manuscript. Explanations are also added to the manuscript
Chen, L., Huang, H., & Li, X. (2022). Microscale gas flow simulation using the lattice Boltzmann method with thermal creep boundary conditions. Physical Review E, 102(1), 013306.
Huang, C., Zhou, P., & Meng, J. (2022). Lattice Boltzmann modeling of gas–liquid two-phase flow in porous media. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 195, 107978.
Li, S., Zheng, Y., Zhang, X., & Luo, K. H. (2022). Large-scale lattice Boltzmann simulations of turbulent channel flows on a GPU cluster. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 157, 119874.
Liu, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, H., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Lattice Boltzmann simulation of two-dimensional heat transfer in porous media with solid matrix heterogeneity. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 157, 119876.
Tang, Y., Zhang, Z., & Luo, K. H. (2023). Multiphase lattice Boltzmann simulations of boiling heat transfer: Influence of substrate wettability. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 152, 119550.
Wang, Y., Zhou, H., & Zhang, X. (2023). Large-scale lattice Boltzmann simulation of transitional channel flows on GPU clusters. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 170, 120693.
Wu, K., Wei, W., & Yan, Y. (2023). Lattice Boltzmann modeling of fluid-structure interaction of a flexible airfoil in a transitional flow. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 176, 121292.
Zhang, L., Luo, K. H., & Lu, X. (2023). Lattice Boltzmann simulation of convective heat transfer enhancement with microencapsulated phase change material in thermal energy storage systems. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 172, 121104.
2) NUMERICAL METHODOLOGY
No comments.
3) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.a I miss a comparison of your results for LBM technique with results obtained for a similar case based on traditional CFD techniques. If I comprehend correctly your argument, it seems that you compare your results internally only. I think the robustness of your approach could be explored with a broader comparison in terms of numerical techniques.
The following explanations and the references are added to the manuscript in order to compare LBM with the traditional CFD methods
It also excels in handling multiphase flows, a crucial aspect in modeling gas-liquid interactions in wind turbines [2]. Moreover, LBM's parallelizability enables efficient utilization of high-performance computing resources, resulting in accelerated simulations [3].
While recent studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of LBM in wind turbine simulations [4, 5], it is essential to compare LBM results with those obtained from traditional CFD techniques to fully assess its robustness. A comprehensive comparison would involve evaluating the accuracy and efficiency of LBM against well-established methods, such as finite volume, finite element, or finite difference methods. By benchmarking LBM against these techniques, researchers can gain a broader understanding of its strengths and limitations in various wind turbine scenarios.
To ensure the credibility and reliability of LBM simulations, it is crucial to perform validation and verification exercises by comparing the results with experimental data and established CFD solutions. By examining how LBM predictions align with these reference cases, researchers can assess the accuracy and reliability of the method and gain confidence in its application to wind turbine simulations.
In conclusion, while the Lattice Boltzmann Method has shown promise in simulating fluid flows around wind turbines, a comprehensive comparison with traditional CFD techniques is necessary to fully evaluate its robustness. By conducting rigorous benchmarking exercises and comparing LBM results with those obtained from well-established numerical methods and experimental data, researchers can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the strengths and limitations of LBM in wind turbine simulations.
[1] Huang, C., Zhou, P., & Meng, J. (2022). Lattice Boltzmann modeling of gas–liquid two-phase flow in porous media. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 195, 107978.
[2] Li, S., Zheng, Y., Zhang, X., & Luo, K. H. (2022). Large-scale lattice Boltzmann simulations of turbulent channel flows on a GPU cluster. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 157, 119874.
[3] Tang, Y., Zhang, Z., & Luo, K. H. (2023). Multiphase lattice Boltzmann simulations of boiling heat transfer: Influence of substrate wettability. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 152, 119550.
[4] Wang, Y., Zhou, H., & Zhang, X. (2023). Large-scale lattice Boltzmann simulation of transitional channel flows on GPU clusters. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 170, 120693.
[5] Wu, K., Wei, W., & Yan, Y. (2023). Lattice Boltzmann modeling of fluid-structure interaction of a flexible airfoil in a transitional flow. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 176, 121292.
3.b Your collection of experimental data used in the paper is not clear. How could one reproduce your results and analysis? All used/generated data must be provided to the reader. You can use Github or Zenodo platform to make the files available.
We would like to highlight that in our study, we have used the experimental data from Lee and Lim (2015) as a reference for validating our numerical simulations of the aerodynamic performance of a Darrieus-type vertical-axis wind turbine. The details and specific parameters of the experimental setup can be found in their publication, which serves as a benchmark for comparison in our study.
Reference:
Lee, Y., & Lim, H. (2015). Numerical study of the aerodynamic performance of a 500 W Darrieus-type vertical-axis wind turbine. Renewable Energy, 83, 407-415.
4) CONCLUSION
4.a You mention that "the power performance of the VAWT increases as the TSR rises, particularly at low TSRs. However, at high TSRs, the interaction between vortices and blades becomes more prominent and significantly influences the blade's performance." I think your results presented in the Section 3 do not explore the previous sentence clearly. Could you explain in more detail how you find this conclusion with your results? I suppose an addtional plot must be used in the Section 3.
A figure was added in order to compare and illustrate the impact of changes in Tip Speed Ratio (TSR) on the power coefficient, while considering different turbulence models. It also allows for a direct comparison with the experimental results obtained from Lee et al. (2015).
5) REFERENCES
5.a I think the references must be updated with more recent results. The latest one is from 2016. I think unprobable the absense of other related papers since then.
We added last researches about LBM methods in comparision of traditional CFD methods
Chen, L., Huang, H., & Li, X. (2022). Microscale gas flow simulation using the lattice Boltzmann method with thermal creep boundary conditions. Physical Review E, 102(1), 013306.
Huang, C., Zhou, P., & Meng, J. (2022). Lattice Boltzmann modeling of gas–liquid two-phase flow in porous media. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 195, 107978.
Li, S., Zheng, Y., Zhang, X., & Luo, K. H. (2022). Large-scale lattice Boltzmann simulations of turbulent channel flows on a GPU cluster. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 157, 119874.
Liu, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, H., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Lattice Boltzmann simulation of two-dimensional heat transfer in porous media with solid matrix heterogeneity. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 157, 119876.
Tang, Y., Zhang, Z., & Luo, K. H. (2023). Multiphase lattice Boltzmann simulations of boiling heat transfer: Influence of substrate wettability. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 152, 119550.
Wang, Y., Zhou, H., & Zhang, X. (2023). Large-scale lattice Boltzmann simulation of transitional channel flows on GPU clusters. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 170, 120693.
Wu, K., Wei, W., & Yan, Y. (2023). Lattice Boltzmann modeling of fluid-structure interaction of a flexible airfoil in a transitional flow. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 176, 121292.
Zhang, L., Luo, K. H., & Lu, X. (2023). Lattice Boltzmann simulation of convective heat transfer enhancement with microencapsulated phase change material in thermal energy storage systems. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 172, 121104.
6) OVERALL
The paper presents a good theoretical work related to the application of the LBM method to investigate wind turbines. There are some missing information which could be easily complemented by the authors in order to accept the paper to be published.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Please find the attached.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to you for your time and effort in reviewing our manuscript. We have carefully considered your comments and have made responses and revisions accordingly. The response is in attachment. All the changes and revision have been highlighted in the manuscript. Thank you once again for your valuable feedback.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
