Articles | Volume 17, issue 12
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4891-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-4891-2024
Development and technical paper
 | 
21 Jun 2024
Development and technical paper |  | 21 Jun 2024

A parameterization scheme for the floating wind farm in a coupled atmosphere–wave model (COAWST v3.7)

Shaokun Deng, Shengmu Yang, Shengli Chen, Daoyi Chen, Xuefeng Yang, and Shanshan Cui

Related authors

Inclusion of the subgrid wake effect between turbines in the wind farm parameterization of WRF
Wei Liu, Xuefeng Yang, Shengli Chen, Shaokun Deng, Peining Yu, and Jiuxing Xing
Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-174,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2023-174, 2023
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary

Related subject area

Atmospheric sciences
The impact of cloud microphysics and ice nucleation on Southern Ocean clouds assessed with single-column modeling and instrument simulators
Andrew Gettelman, Richard Forbes, Roger Marchand, Chih-Chieh Chen, and Mark Fielding
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 8069–8092, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8069-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8069-2024, 2024
Short summary
An updated aerosol simulation in the Community Earth System Model (v2.1.3): dust and marine aerosol emissions and secondary organic aerosol formation
Yujuan Wang, Peng Zhang, Jie Li, Yaman Liu, Yanxu Zhang, Jiawei Li, and Zhiwei Han
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7995–8021, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7995-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7995-2024, 2024
Short summary
Exploring ship track spreading rates with a physics-informed Langevin particle parameterization
Lucas A. McMichael, Michael J. Schmidt, Robert Wood, Peter N. Blossey, and Lekha Patel
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7867–7888, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7867-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7867-2024, 2024
Short summary
Do data-driven models beat numerical models in forecasting weather extremes? A comparison of IFS HRES, Pangu-Weather, and GraphCast
Leonardo Olivetti and Gabriele Messori
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7915–7962, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7915-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7915-2024, 2024
Short summary
Development of the MPAS-CMAQ coupled system (V1.0) for multiscale global air quality modeling
David C. Wong, Jeff Willison, Jonathan E. Pleim, Golam Sarwar, James Beidler, Russ Bullock, Jerold A. Herwehe, Rob Gilliam, Daiwen Kang, Christian Hogrefe, George Pouliot, and Hosein Foroutan
Geosci. Model Dev., 17, 7855–7866, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7855-2024,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-7855-2024, 2024
Short summary

Cited articles

Abkar, M. and Porté-Agel, F.: A new wind-farm parameterization for large-scale atmospheric models, J. Renew. Sustain. Energ., 7, 013121, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4907600, 2015. 
Alari, V. and Raudsepp, U.: Simulation of wave damping near coast due to offshore wind farms, J. Coast. Res., 279, 143–148, https://doi.org/10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-10-00054.1, 2012. 
AlSam, A., Szasz, R., and Revstedt, J.: The influence of sea waves on offshore wind turbine aerodynamics, J. Energ. Resour. Technol., Transactions of the ASME, 137, 1–10, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4031005, 2015. 
Archer, C., Wu, S., Ma, Y., and Jiménez, P.: Two corrections for turbulent kinetic energy generated by wind farms in the WRF model, Mon. Weather Rev., 148, 4823–4835, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-20-0097.1, 2020. 
Battjes, J. and Janssen, J.: Energy loss and set-up due to breaking of random waves, Costal Eng. Proc., 1, 32, https://doi.org/10.9753/icce.v16.32, 1978. 
Download
Short summary
Global offshore wind power development is moving from offshore to deeper waters, where floating offshore wind turbines have an advantage over bottom-fixed turbines. However, current wind farm parameterization schemes in mesoscale models are not applicable to floating turbines. We propose a floating wind farm parameterization scheme that accounts for the attenuation of the significant wave height by floating turbines. The results indicate that it has a significant effect on the power output.