Connect with us

Published

on

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

R&D Test Systems: Digital Twins for Wind Turbine Testing

Allen Hall and Joel Saxum interview Dr. Elif Ecem Bas, a PhD project engineer at R&D Test Systems in Denmark. Dr. Bas discusses how R&D Test Systems is leveraging digital twin technologies and hybrid testing to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of testing wind turbine components, particularly pitch bearings.

Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly email update on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, Linkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary Barnes’ YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!

Pardalote Consulting – https://www.pardaloteconsulting.com
Weather Guard Lightning Tech – www.weatherguardwind.com
Intelstor – https://www.intelstor.com

Allen Hall: Welcome to the Uptime Wind Energy Podcast. I’m your host, Allen Hall, along with my co host, Joel Saxum. As wind turbines grow in size and complexity, testing these components has become increasingly expensive and time consuming. To address these challenges, R&D Test Systems is leveraging digital twin technologies to improve the efficiency of their test bed.

Benches, ultimately reducing testing time and costs. And if you don’t already know, R&D Test Systems is a leading company in the wind energy industry, providing testing solutions for wind turbine components on a massive scale. Today we have the pleasure of speaking with Ecem Bas, a PhD project engineer.

At R&D Test Systems in Denmark, Dr. Bas earned her PhD in structural engineering from the University of Nevada, Reno, and is currently focusing on digital twin technologies at R&D Test Systems. In this interview, we will delve into the applications of digital twin technology and wind turbine component testing and learn more about Dr.

Bas’s work in this cutting edge field. Ecem, Welcome to the program.

Elif Ecem Bas: Thank you. And thanks a lot for the introduction.

Allen Hall: So there’s a lot to learn here because Joel and I have been following the digital twin saga over the last several years because you see a lot of of news articles and information about digital twins and OEMs or have been looking at it and a lot of smaller companies have been trying to prove out digital twins.

But we haven’t seen a lot of it being applied in a place where I think it’s important, which is in the testing phase. And R&D Test Systems if you haven’t worked with R&D Test Systems, build some of the largest pieces of test equipment in the world to test generators up to 25 megawatts and all kind of blades, just insanely big things.

So what is the benefit of using Digital Twin on such large test equipment?

Elif Ecem Bas: Let’s come one step back. As you mentioned in your introduction. Testing is necessity for all the wind turbine components and their subcomponents as well. This is required by the standards and this is required by the design and also the manufacturing.

So we will not get rid of testing. Testing is very important. But as the wind turbines are getting bigger and bigger, this time to test these components takes also a lot of time. And for as an example for a blade to test the Fatigue test to make a fatigue test for a blade. It takes one year or more than a year to do the saw

Joel Saxum: Constant movement.

Elif Ecem Bas: Yeah, exactly to see all the damages through the blade. You have to do that and also for a highly accelerated lifetime testing of an assault. This also takes six and eight months and also testing this. These are large facilities, right? And testing this will also cost money. tens of million euros bought to establish and run this.

And this leads, of course, longer time to market. For new and more powerful wind turbines. In detail systems, we are trying to develop digital tools to overcome these challenges and to have these turbines to roll onto the market. So and also yeah, cut cost on it. And what we are using digital twins in the testing, it is very necessary because we would like to reduce the cost of the down time in the testing itself, in the test execution itself.

Allen Hall: So there are portions of testing, from my understanding, and I’m an electrical engineer and I’m a mechanical engineer, but I’ve spent about a lot of structural testing. Those tests take a long time, they’re very expensive, but sometimes the result we get out of those tests isn’t very useful in the real world.

On the other side of this, you’ve got two problems. One is that, does the test match what’s happening in service? That’s a really great question. The second half is, how much do you know about this product before you start testing it? Or are you testing the way? You’re touching the engineering aspects properly to evaluate that for the real world.

And I think you, you run into two problems here and I want to understand this part first, which is you model the component, but you don’t model all aspects of it. And I want to, I Can you walk through that a little bit, like what you’re trying to do with a device, a blade, or a gearbox, or anything else, a pitch bearing?

Elif Ecem Bas: As you mentioned, there are two aspects. So in the component test, we just take one component and test it, right? And with our, Digital twin technologies, we focus on both simulating the complete system, whereas we only test one component and model the remaining parts. So this is one thing, and we call this hybrid testing because one part is tested experimentally, whereas the remaining components are modeled numerically.

And we do this in In a closed loop system where we share at every time step, we share the commands and feedbacks with the test bench. So this is one aspect where we test. Only one component, let’s say it is the pitch bearing, and model the remaining part, which is the blade and the hub and the other parts, the other blades.

Allen Hall: Alright, so that’s interesting. That’s a complicated model though, right? When you try to do that.

Elif Ecem Bas: Exactly.

Allen Hall: So you have to simplify it so you can model it. How are you finding those sort of the key characteristics so you can model it on a test bench properly?

Elif Ecem Bas: Why we do hybrid testing? Hybrid testing is to get the both advantages from the experimental world and from the analytical world.

So we do hybrid testing for the components that we cannot model properly. In this case, it is, we choose that it is the pitch bearing because it’s very hard to model.

Joel Saxum: Makes sense. Yeah. Yeah.

Elif Ecem Bas: Yeah. And also the pitch bearing itself. So bearings are designed to roll, right? But the pitch bearing is rolling a little bit and then exposed to the bending moments for their lifetime.

So it’s against to its own nature. So this is why also predicting the failure mechanisms of the pitch bearing is a bit hard. Another thing is, when it is failed, it is very hard to backtrace what was the cause of this failure, because you cannot model it properly. So what we are doing is, since this part is hard to model, we put it in an experimental setup.

And the blade and the remaining part, the other kinematics are relatively easier to model.

Joel Saxum: That’s a good word. Relatively. Yeah.

Elif Ecem Bas: And so it took that part and we use that simplified models to apply more realistic loading scenarios to the pitch bearing. In order to get its behavior.

Joel Saxum: A question here like Allen said earlier pitch bearings is a headache for, man, what would you say, 90 percent of the people we talk to, Allen? Oh, easily, yes. When we’re thinking about you guys advancing the testing mechanism for us, because it’s, it is, just, if you picture it in your head, It is, a bearing is designed for that rolling surface, however, this not only is exposed to the root bending moment of the blades, basically, on a fulcrum, pulling and pushing on it, but it’s also having gravitational loads at the exact same time, going up, sideways, down so you have this really complex load scenario.

You guys coming forth with something that could hopefully accelerate lifetime testing,

Elif Ecem Bas: Yeah. Also, we are looking into testing extreme cases in this scenario. So picking up extreme wind load event and test this and hopefully see the development of a failure with the test.

Joel Saxum: That with everybody with pitch bearings.

If you talk to anybody in the manufacturing sector, it’s it’s really hard to do an accelerate at any kind of lifetime testing. For that pitch, because it isn’t when you look at it in the crate, right? That is a robust piece of metal. That’s a big, bad thing, right? If anybody’s ever seen one of these it’s impressive how big it is and how heavy it is and how much steel there is.

But to test that you can’t you can’t do a life cycle test in six months on that thing. It’s just not possible.

Elif Ecem Bas: Exactly. And also what. We hear from the test centers that they cannot see the failures with this highly accelerated lifetime test on it. So what we are looking into, okay, we have this extreme load case scenario.

Can we apply this with hybrid testing and can we see the development of the failure of this component?

Allen Hall: Let me ask you about the complexities of pitch bearing, because I think Joel brought it up at a really high level, but I want to focus in, drill down to how complex this is. So you have this massively long blade, right?

The blades are getting longer, so the center of gravity is moving further and further out, the center of lift on them is moving also, the blades are flexing, right? Then you got the gravitational pull. piece. But on top of that, now you’ve added a control system in the turbine, which is pitching the blades as they rotate around the 360.

So you have this, and you’re not necessarily sure what the OEM is doing with their pitch control system. That’s not widely disclosed as to say it that way. So when you’re looking for failure modes on a, particularly a new blade with a new control system, On mostly an existing bearing structure, you have a lot of unknowns there.

And we have, as we have, Joel has pointed out, we have a lot of operators around the world that are complaining about pitch for each breaking and yet they passed all the required tests for to get type certification. So now we’re going back and this is where I think the brain powered R&D Test Systems really matters here.

Now you’re able to apply some knowledge because now we see these failures. And then can you model those failures? Are you able to digital twin the failure mode and then place that back into the new testing regime?

Elif Ecem Bas: Yeah, first of all, we have to see that if we can track these failures with the hybrid testing while applying these extreme load scenarios.

And as you mentioned, in our, now in our test configuration, we have two actuators, to apply the bending moment of the blade. And we also have the third actuator to model the pitch angle, to control the pitch angle. So we are also making it yeah, rotate to pitch, and then to apply the bending moments. We are But these cal these are all coming from the simulation world, so all these bending moment calculations are coming from the simulation world of this blade.

So we calculate a bending moment at the blade, which will be applied to the pitch. And we apply this in the test bench itself.

Allen Hall: So let me ask, let me go down this rabbit hole a little bit further. Because it’s a very complicated mechanical problem, right? It’s probably one of the most difficult mechanical problems out there today because of the quantities of product and the cost involved.

You have this, you have a fixed hub diameter for the most part as the blades get longer. So the load paths in that are are unique. There’s not they’re not simple, right? So when you’re creating a piece of test equipment to go evaluate and in this hybrid condition, I’m trying to go through the thought process of what R&D Test Systems is trying to do here because you have so many variables you have this I’ll call it a black box of control system like there’s inputs and there’s outputs and so you’re looking at the outputs into the bearing How do you then when you go to create that piece of test equipment to test it?

determine how these failures are occurring. Do you just, do you design the equipment based upon that control system, that digital twin?

Elif Ecem Bas: So for this specific case, it is slightly different. We have this research and development project with the university, Aarhus University and FORCE Technology, and Together with this team, we developed this hybrid testing framework for pitch pairings.

All of us together are, is designed this let’s say test setup. But this is not the similar ones that we develop here. We usually develop large scale test benches. This is considerably small, and we would like to get yeah, apply the know how and see the results of hybrid testing.

And what we are also helping with our customers here, as you said, there are so many people are involved. So the the control system of the, uh, OEM is their own IP protected and the blade is maybe the blade model is that they don’t want to share.

Allen Hall: Definitely IP.

Elif Ecem Bas: Exactly. It’s also even the wind load could be an IP issue.

So what we are also trying to to give our customers as a service is how to combine these pieces together.

Allen Hall: Okay, that’s brilliant. All right, so then that drives the cost down because you’re applying so much knowledge ahead of time. So when you get to the test scenario, you know what you’re looking for already.

These are the features. These are the failure modes because of the way the control system is designed and operating. This is how we’re going to test these bearings in a real world scenario. How much cost reduction and time shortening does that does that, does occur because of your digital twin?

Elif Ecem Bas: Another aspect of digital twin, as I just mentioned, we are trying to provide a platform for our customers to put their models into. Together. So it’s not that high, only the hybrid testing that we are focusing on, but we are also focusing on combining different simulation models. So it could be if it is a test bench, it is the test bench and analytical models that are combined, but it could be also test bench models combined with OEMs device under test.

So we are also looking into that. Yeah. So we are yeah, as also as you mentioned, this is extremely IP secured way and we are trying to solve this problem. In terms of time constant, like How much time can we reduce? Cannot give an exact number, but this will improve the collaboration between the partners.

As an example, this is apart from hybrid testing to prepare for a test. This can take several months. So how does how the people test is they design a component in a digital world. And then they create some load sequences and they contact contact to the test operators. They say they want to test this test sequences in their test bench.

So there are so many back and forth, even for the planning of this large tests. So what we are trying to do with these digital tools is to give our customers and also the test bench operators a platform where they can. Plug in their models and then execute these test scenarios beforehand before the test execution so that they can save time.

in both planning and they can also reduce time in the test campaigns that wouldn’t make sense.

Joel Saxum: Ecem, when we talked off air, we talked about a little bit about this, right? This kind of, this concept of the functional mock up interface and the function, yeah, and the functional mock up unit where it’s basically like you guys took the concept from the automotive world, from their advanced testing processes, right?

Elif Ecem Bas: The FMI standard was developed Yeah. Yeah. By an automate by automated industry. So this was and this standard is out there for several years, and it is quite mature in that industry. And what we are trying to do in the wind industry or also in the testing, we are trying to adapt This technology to our models in our system as well.

Joel Saxum: Yeah. The cool thing about that was you said basically, because it is a standard that’s been used for it, this is the black box stuff, right? This is how an OEM can protect it, protect their IP come to you guys. It goes through the functional mockup interface, that black box there, where they.

And then everything comes into your side, you’re able to test. But the cool thing about that is, is since it is an automotive standard, it’s the practices out there. People have knowledge of it. There’s multiple. I think you said over 200 different tools are available to work through with this as well.

So there’s a lot of stuff that’s. That’s there. It’s just getting the, basically the wind industry or the, that industrial testing that you guys do up to speed with the, what the rest of the world is doing and, or not the rest of the world, but different industries are doing.

Elif Ecem Bas: Exactly. There are many commercial and also open source tools that are available to use this Functional lockup interface standard.

Allen Hall: Can I walk through a test case? And I want to get a jams input on this because we see the, see this a lot. And Joel and I have been around a lot of wind turbines over the last couple of months. And as Joel has pointed out, pitch bearings is the main problem. You see a lot of cranes replacing pitch bearings.

Okay. So the question we get asked all the time is, Hey, the OEM has offered us an upgrade to these pitch bearings to prevent this problem. I want you to describe the problem and say it’s a problem. In the meantime, I have other pitch bearing manufacturers saying they have a replacement that doesn’t require the fix.

Now, both of those may be right, both of them may be wrong, but I think what’s happening now is that the operators are thinking about doing testing on their own. And if they do that, the, your hybrid digital twin approach makes a lot of sense for them because it’s going to, it takes the OEM and the other manufacturers of these devices out of the picture and lets them focus on what’s really happening.

Now How would they I’m thinking of a couple large OEMs in the United States and in Europe that have this problem, how would they connect with you to do that testing? Would they just say, Hey, Ajam, this is the turbine we have, this is the bearing we have. We need you to look at this fix or solution and just let you go with it.

Or how does that interaction work?

Elif Ecem Bas: First of all, we define which part. So which. What component are we testing? Then we design the test setup accordingly for this test for this hybrid testing scenario. Because as I mentioned, we need to have the pitch actuator, we need to have the other actuators to apply this to that.

And then, Once we want to involve the models, we have to walk through with them how to define these black boxes. Then we define, once we define the interface, because we will tell them what to share in between the test bench and the model. So we will not help with that. So they will have We can help them to put this in a black box.

And also we tell them, okay, you need these five signals that are coming to this test bench, and you will get these five to your model. So we define these interfaces. together with them and then help them to put this in this black box, let’s say, and then help them execute this test campaign.

Joel Saxum: Allen, what you’re saying here right now in my mind starts screaming joint industry project between the asset owners. Get a bunch of them together that have the same machines and go test them themselves. Try to find a fix. It could work.

Allen Hall: R&D Test Systems is the place to test it because they test large items and they’ve been doing it for years and they have all the technical know how and the equipment to go test it.

So R&D Test Systems is the right place to do it. I think you’re right Joel, connecting operators together to work with a job to create the control system, the black box, the hybrid, is the real link. that we’re missing at the moment. And that needs to be done.

Elif Ecem Bas: Just to give a comment, we don’t have, we don’t own the test.

We are not a test bench operator. We are test bench developers. So we know a lot about developing the test systems to test these equipments. So yeah, we don’t have our own test bench facility, but we help we know that side. And we can help our customers to develop these.

Joel Saxum: Yes. All of the things that we’ve been talking about, this is your baby at R&D Test Systems.

You’ve been your PhD is in it and the hybrid testing and everything like you are the expert in it. But my, where I’m falling down a little bit is that this is not this way of testing and this methodology and these idea of digital twins and hybrid testing, this isn’t standard yet.

So this is not in the IEC standard. This isn’t. A rule that they have to, anybody has to follow right now. It’s still in that R&D phase. We you’re sitting in this chat, this should be how we do it. And I believe that this is definitely the future, but how do you feel about, like, where do you see it going?

Do you see this being adopted as mainstream? This is how we’re going to test stuff, or is it still going to be an R&D thing for a while?

Elif Ecem Bas: Yeah, very good question. I think the industry needs Kind of this collaborative platform, both for hybrid testing and also digital twins, because we can see that this is Requirements because everyone wants to improve their both modeling and testing, and we for sure need to collaborate more to do you’re right for hybrid testing itself for components. Hybrid testing. There is no standards, but there is hardware in the loop testing, which is in IEC standards, which is not exactly. hybrid testing, but it is also hybrid testing. So I can see that it would also come at some point for component testing as well.

Yeah, I don’t know when, but it will come because this kind of there are so many challenges and we have solutions to these challenges. So I think it will come at some point. Yes.

Joel Saxum: Yeah. You’ve got two great partners in the University of Aarhus and force technology bringing in the issues and helping you develop those things.

But what you, I think what you are sitting on and your department, your team, what you guys are working on could be a fix for some of the large problems that our industry is seeing. You. Everybody’s complaining about OEM quality or OEM this, nah, I don’t want to bash on the OEMs, but like they’re getting components that are failing.

The answer could be, advanced better testing to develop better products before they go out into the field because now we have Platforms with 000 machines out in the world where they have a component that keeps failing on them. While that’s good for the aftermarket companies and the people selling the extra bearings.

That’s not good for the general grid and the energy transition, right? So you guys have that piece there that could be the link between making the wind turbines that are in the field more effective at staying, guaranteeing uptime. That’s what we want. That’s why you’re, that’s why we’re all here.

Allen Hall: And Joel, That’s a good segue because I think we wanted to highlight Ajam’s and R&D test systems technology and make sure everybody understood that there is an alternative out there rather than just taking the component from the manufacturer and saying, yeah, trust me there is another way to do this, which is to actually look at it from a systems perspective and that’s what Ajam is doing here.

Ajam, how do they, how do people get ahold of you and how to. How do people contact R&D Test Systems?

Elif Ecem Bas: Yeah, you can find me on LinkedIn, it’s Elif Ecem Bas. You can also find us in our website, rdtestsystems.com

Allen Hall: Ecem, thank you so much for being on the podcast. I’ve learned a tremendous amount. I know Joel has.

And thank you for addressing one of the big problems of wind energy today. I’m glad you’re working on this. Thank you so much for being on the podcast.

Elif Ecem Bas: Thank you.

https://weatherguardwind.com/rd-test-systems-digital-twins-for-wind-turbine-testing/

Continue Reading

Renewable Energy

Morten Handberg Breaks Down Leading Edge Erosion

Published

on

Weather Guard Lightning Tech

Morten Handberg Breaks Down Leading Edge Erosion

Morten Handberg, Uptime’s blade whisperer, returns to the show to tackle leading edge erosion. He covers the fatigue physics behind rain erosion, why OEMs offer no warranty coverage for it, how operators should time repairs before costs multiply, and what LEP solutions are working in the field.

Sign up now for Uptime Tech News, our weekly newsletter on all things wind technology. This episode is sponsored by Weather Guard Lightning Tech. Learn more about Weather Guard’s StrikeTape Wind Turbine LPS retrofit. Follow the show on YouTubeLinkedin and visit Weather Guard on the web. And subscribe to Rosemary’s “Engineering with Rosie” YouTube channel here. Have a question we can answer on the show? Email us!

Welcome to Uptime Spotlight, shining Light on Wind. Energy’s brightest innovators. This is the Progress Powering Tomorrow.

Allen Hall: Morten, welcome back to the program.

Morten Handberg: Thanks, Allen. It’s fantastic to be back on on, on the podcast. Really excited to, uh, record an episode on Erosion Today.

Allen Hall: Wow. Leading as erosion is such a huge worldwide issue and. Operators are having big problems with it right now. It does seem like there’s not a lot of information readily available to operators to understand the issue quite yet.

Morten Handberg: Well, it, I mean, it’s something that we’ve been looking at for the, at least the past 10 years. We started looking at it when I was in in DONG or as it back in 2014. But we also saw it very early on because we were in offshore environment, much harsher. Uh, rain erosion conditions, and you were also starting to change the way that the, the, uh, the coatings [00:01:00]that were applied.

So there was sort of a, there was several things at play that meant that we saw very early on, early on offshore.

Allen Hall: Well, let’s get to the basics of rain erosion and leading edge erosion. What is the physics behind it? What, what happens to the leading edges of these blades as rain? Impacts them.

Morten Handberg: Well, you should see it as um, millions of, of small fat, uh, small fatigue loads on the coating because each raindrop, it creates a small impact load on the blade.

It creates a rail wave that sort of creates a. Uh, share, share loads out on, uh, into the coating that is then absorbed by the coating, by the filler and and so on. And the more absorbent that your substrate is, the longer survivability you, you’re leading into coating will have, uh, if you have manufacturing defects in the coating, that will accelerate the erosion.

But it is a fatigue effect that is then accelerated or decelerate depending on, uh, local blade conditions.

Allen Hall: Yeah, what I’ve seen in the [00:02:00] field is the blades look great. Nothing. Nothing. You don’t see anything happening and then all of a sudden it’s like instantaneous, like a fatigue failure.

Morten Handberg: I mean, a lot of things is going on.

Uh, actually you start out by, uh, by having it’s, they call, it’s called mass loss and it’s actually where the erosion is starting to change the material characteristics of the coating. And that is just the first step. So you don’t see that. You can measure it in a, um, in the laboratory setting, you can actually see that there is a changing in, in the coating condition.

You just can’t see it yet. Then you start to get pitting, and that is these very, very, very small, almost microscopic chippings of the coating. They will then accelerate and then you start to actually see the first sign, which is like a slight, a braided surface. It’s like someone took a, a fine grain sandpaper across the surface of the plate, but you only see it on the leading edge.

If it’s erosion, it’s only on the center of the leading edge. That’s very important. If you see it on the sides and further down, then it’s, it’s [00:03:00] something else. Uh, it’s not pure erosion, but then you see this fine grain. Then as that progresses, you see more and more and more chipping, more and more degradation across the, the leading edge of the blade.

Worse in the tip of it, less so into the inner third of the blade, but it is a gradual process that you see over the leading edge. Finally, you’ll then start to see the, uh, the coating coming off and you’ll start to see exposed laminate. Um, and from there it can, it can accelerate or exposed filler or laminate.

From there, it can accelerate because. Neither of those are actually designed to handle any kind of erosion.

Allen Hall: What are the critical variables in relation to leading edge erosion? Which variables seem to matter most? Is it raindrop size? Is it tip speed? What factors should we be looking for?

Morten Handberg: Tip speeds and rain intensity.

Uh, obviously droplet size have an impact, but. But what is an operator you can actually see and monitor for is, well, you know, your tip speed of the blade that matters. Uh, but it is really the rain intensity. So if you have [00:04:00] sort of a, an average drizzle over the year, that’s a much better condition than if you have like, you know, showers in, in, in, in a, in a few hour sessions at certain points of time.

Because then, then it becomes an aggressive erosion. It’s not, it’s, you don’t, you get much higher up on the. On the, on the fatigue curve, uh, then if it’s just an average baseline load over long periods of time,

Allen Hall: yeah, that fatigue curve really does matter. And today we’re looking at what generally is called VN curves, velocity versus number of impacts, and.

The rain erosion facilities I’ve seen, I’ve been able to, to give some parameters to, uh, provide a baseline or a comparison between different kinds of coatings. Is is that the, the standard as everybody sees it today, the sort of the VN curve

Morten Handberg: that is what’s been developed by this scientific, uh, community, these VN curve, that that gives you some level of measure.

I would still say, you know, from what we can do in a rain erosion tester to what is then actually going on [00:05:00] the field is still very two very, very, very different things you can say. If you can survive a thousand hours in a rain erosion tester, then it’s the similar in the field that doesn’t really work like that.

But there are comparisons so you can do, you know, uh, a relationship study, uh, between them. And you can use the VN curves to determine the ERO erosion aggressiveness. Field. We did that in the bait defect forecasting that we did in wind pile up with DCU back in 2019, uh, where we actually looked at rain erosion across Europe.

Uh, and then the, uh, the actual erosion propagation that we saw within these different sites, both for offshore and for onshore, where we actually mapped out, um, across Europe, you know, which areas will be the most erosion prone. And then utilize that to, to then mo then, then to determine what would be the red, the best maintenance strategy and also, uh, erosion, uh, LEP, uh, solution for that wind farm.

Allen Hall: Oh, okay. Uh, is it raindrop size then, or just [00:06:00] quantity of raindrops? Obviously drizzle has smaller impact. There’s less mass there, but larger raindrops, more frequent rain.

Morten Handberg: If you have showers, it tends to be larger drops. Right. So, so they kind of follow each other. And if it’s more of a drizzle. It will be smaller raindrops.

They typically follow each other. You know, if you’ve been outside in a rainstorm before we just showered, you would have sense that these are, these are much higher, you know, raindrop sizes. So, so there is typically an a relation between raindrop size and then showers versus a drizzle. It’s typically more fine, fine grain rain drops.

Allen Hall: And what impact does dirt and debris mixed in with the rain, uh, affect leading edge erosion? I know a lot of, there’s a lot of concern. And farm fields and places where there’s a lot of plowing and turnover of the dirt that it, it, it does seem like there’s more leading edge erosion and I, I think there’s a little bit of an unknown about it, uh, just because they see leading edge [00:07:00]erosion close to these areas where there’s a lot of tilling going on.

Is it just dirt impact worth a blade or is it a combination of dirt plus rain and, and those two come combining together to make a worse case. Uh, damage scenario.

Morten Handberg: Technically it would be slightly worse than if it were, if there is some soil or, or sand, or sand contamination in the raindrops. But I mean, logically rain typically, you know, comes down from the sky.

It doesn’t, you know, it doesn’t mix in with the dirt then, you know, it would be more if you have dirt on the blades. It’s typically during a dry season where it would get mixed up and then blown onto the blades. Honestly, I don’t think that that is really what’s having an impact, because having contamination in the blade is not something that is, that would drive erosion.

I think that that is, I think that is, that is a misunderstanding. We do see sand, sand erosion in some part of the world where you have massive, uh, sand, uh, how do you say, sandstorms [00:08:00] coming through and, and that actually creates an, an abrasive wear on the plate. It looks different from rain erosion because it’s two different mechanisms.

Uh, where the sand is actually like a sandpaper just blowing across the surface, so you can see that. Whereas rain is more of this fatigue effect. So I think in the, theoretically if you had soil mixed in with rain, yes that could have an impact because you would have an a, a hardened particle. But I do, I don’t think it’s what’s driving erosion, to be honest.

Allen Hall: Okay, so then there’s really two different kinds of failure modes. A particle erosion, which is more of an abrasive erosion, which I would assume be a maybe a little wider, spread along the leading edge of the blade versus a fatigue impact from a raindrop collision. They just look different, right?

Morten Handberg: Yeah, so, so sand erosion you could have spreading across a larger surface of the blade because it, because it doesn’t bounce off in the same way that a raindrop would, you know, because that’s more of an impact angle and the load that it’s applying.

So if it comes in at a, at a st [00:09:00] at a, um, at the, at the, at a, at a steep angle, then it would just bounce off because the amount of load that it’s impacting on would be very limited. So that’s also why we don’t really see it on the, um, uh, outside of the leading edge. Whereas sand erosion would have a, would, would have a different effect because even at a steep angle, it would still, you know, create some kind of wear because of the hardened particle and the effect of that.

Allen Hall: Okay. So let’s talk about incubation period, because I’ve seen a lot of literature. Talking about incubation period and, and what that means. What does incubation period mean on a leading edge coating?

Morten Handberg: So that is, that, that is from when you start having the first impacts until you get the, the, the change in structure.

So when you get to the mass loss or first pitting, that would be your incubation period, because that is from when it starts until you can see the actual effects. Would say that, that that is what would be defined as the incubation period of leading into erosion.

Allen Hall: Okay. So you wanna then maximize the incubation period where the coating still looks mostly pristine [00:10:00] once incubation period is over and you get into the coating.

Are there different rates at which the coatings will deteriorate, or are they all pretty much deteriorating at roughly the same rate?

Morten Handberg: I mean, for the really high durability. We don’t really have good enough data to say anything about whether the, um, the, the period after the incubation period, whether that would actually, how that would work in the field.

We don’t really know that yet. I would say, because the, um, some of the, the shell solutions, some of the high end polyurethane coatings, if they fail, typically it’s because of workmanship. Or adhesion issues. It’s has so far not really been tied in directly in, into leading edge erosion. Uh, the ones that I’ve seen, so typically, and, and, you know, all of these high-end coatings, they’re just, they, they have shown, you know, some of them you couldn’t even wear down in a rain erosion tester.

Um, so, so we don’t really know. Um, how, [00:11:00] how the, how the shells, they would, they, they, they, they, how they would react over the five, 10 year period because we haven’t seen that much yet. And what we have seen have been more of a mechanical failure in, in the bonding

Allen Hall: that, I guess that makes sense. Then operators are still buying wind turbine blades without any leading edge coating at all.

It is basically a painted piece of fiberglass structure. Is that still advisable today or are there places where you could just get away with that? Or is that just not reality because of the tip speeds?

Morten Handberg: For the larger, I would say anything beyond two megawatt turbines, you should have leading edge protection because you’re at tip speeds where, you know, any kind of rain would create erosion within, um, within the lifetime of the late.

That is just a fact. Um, so. I don’t, I don’t see any real areas of the world where that would not apply. And if it, if you are in a place where it’s really dry, then it would typically also mean that then you would have sand erosion. Is that, that, [00:12:00] that would, I would expect that it would be one of the two.

You wouldn’t be in an area where it couldn’t get any kind of erosion to the blades. Um, so either you should have either a very tough gel code, um, coating, or you should have have an LEP per urethane based coating. On the blades,

Allen Hall: well do the manufacturers provide data on the leading edge offerings, on the coatings, or even the harder plastic shells or shields.

Does, is there any information? If I’m an operator and I’m buying a a three megawatt turbine that comes along with the blade that says, this is the li, this is the estimated lifetime, is that a thing right now? Or is it just We’re putting on a coating and we are hoping for the best?

Morten Handberg: The OEMs, as far as I, I haven’t seen any.

Any contract or agreement where today, where erosion is not considered a wear and tear issue, there is simply no, no coverage for it. So if you buy a turbine and there’s any kind of leading [00:13:00] edge erosion outside of the end of warranty period, it’s your your problem. There is no guarantee on that.

Allen Hall: So the operator is at risk,

Morten Handberg: well, they’re at risk and if they don’t take matters into their own hands and make decisions on their own.

But they would still be locked in because within the warranty period, they will still be tied to the OEM and the decisions that they make. And if they have a service agreement with the OEM, then they would also be tied in with what the OEM provides.

Allen Hall: So that does place a lot of the burden on the owner operator to understand the effects of rate erosion, particularly at the at a new site if they don’t have any history on it at all.

To then try to identify a, a coating or some sort of protecting device to prevent leading edge erosion. ’cause at the end of the day, it does sound like the operator owner is gonna be responsible for fixing it and keeping the blades, uh, in some aerodynamic shape. That that’s, that’s a big hurdle for a lot of operators.

Morten Handberg: The problem is that if you have a service [00:14:00]contract, but you are depending on the OEM, providing that service. Then you have to be really certain that any leading edge erosion or anywhere on the leading edge is then covered by that contract. Otherwise, you’re in, you’re in a really bad, you’re in a really risky situation because you can’t do anything on your own.

Because if you’re a service contract, but you’re beholden to whatever the, your service provider is, is, is agreeing to providing to you. So you might not get the best service.

Allen Hall: And what are the risks of this? Uh, obviously there can be some structural issues. Particularly around the tips of the blaze, but that’s also power loss.

What are typical power loss numbers?

Morten Handberg: Well, there is a theoretically theoretical power loss to it, but for any modern turbine, the blade, the, the turbine would simply regulate itself out of any leading erosion loss. So, so the blades would just change their behavior that the turbine would just change, its its operation [00:15:00]conditions so that it would achieve the same lift to the blade.

So. Uh, any study that we have done or been a part of, uh, even, you know, comparing blades that were repaired, blades that were cleaned, blades that were, uh, left eroded, and then operating the, uh, the deviation was within half, half percent and that was within the margin of error. We couldn’t read, we couldn’t see it even for really, you know, really er road blades.

Of course there is different between turbines. Some turbines, they, they could show it, but I haven’t seen any data that suggests that erosion actually leads to a lot of power loss. There is a theoretical loss because there is a loss in aerodynamic performance, but because blades today they’re pitch controlled, then you can, you can regulate yourself out of that.

Some of that, uh, power laws,

Allen Hall: so the control laws in the turbine. Would know what the wind speeds are and what their power output should be, and it’ll adjust the [00:16:00]pitch of each of the blades sort of independently to, to drive the power output.

Morten Handberg: Typically, erosion is a uniform issue, so what happens on one blade happens on three.

So it’s rare to see that one blade is just completely erod in the two other they look fine. That’s really rare unless you start, you know, doing uh, abnormal repairs on them. Then you might get something. But even then, I mean, we’re not talking, you know, 10 per 10 degrees in, in variation. You know, it’s not, it’s not anything like that.

It’s very small changes. And if they would do a lot of weird DA, you know, uh, different angles, you would get instant imbalance and then, you know, you would get scatter alarm. So, so you would see that quite fast.

Allen Hall: Well, let me, let me just understand this just a little bit. So what the control logs would do would increase the pitch angle of the blaze, be a little more aggressive.

On power production to bring the power production up. If leading edge erosion was knocking it down a percentage point or two, does that have a consequence? Are like when you [00:17:00] start pitching the blades at slightly different angles, does that increase the area where rain erosion will occur? Is like, are you just.

Keep chasing this dragon by doing that,

Morten Handberg: you could change the area a little bit, but it’s not, it’s not something that, that changes the erosion, uh, that the erosion zone, that that much. It’s very minimal. Um, and one, one of the, another, another reason why, why you might see it might, might not see it as much is because voltage generator panels is widely used in the industry today.

And, and Vortex panel, they are. Uh, negating some of the negative effect from, uh, leading erosion. So that also adds to the effect that there, that the aerodynamic effect of leading erosion is limited, uh, compared to what we’ve seen in the past.

Allen Hall: Okay. So there’s a couple manufacturers that do use vortex generators around the tip, around the leading edge erosion areas right outta the factory, and then there’s other OEMs that don’t do that at all.

Is, is there a benefit to [00:18:00] having the VGs. Right out of the factory. Is that, is that just to, uh, as you think about the power output of the generator over time, like, this is gonna gimme a longer time before I have to do anything. Is, is in terms of repair,

Morten Handberg: it does help you if you have contamination of the blade.

It does help you if you have surface defects off the blade. That, that any, uh, any change to the air, to the aerodynamics is, is reduced and that’s really important if you have an optimized blade. Then the negative effect of leading erosion might get, uh, you know, might, might, might get, might get affected.

But there are, there are still reasons why I do want to do leading erosion repairs. You should do that anyway, even if you can’t see it on your power curve or not, because if you wait too long, you’ll start to get structural damages to the blade. As we talked about last time. It’s not that leading edge erosion will turn into a critical damage right away, but if you need, if you go into structural erosion, then the, then the cost of damage.

The cost of repairing the damage will multiply. Uh, [00:19:00] and at, at a certain point, you know, you will get a re structure. It might not make the blade, you know, uh, cost a, a condition where the blade could collapse or you’re at risk, but you do get a weakened blade that is then susceptible to damage from other sources.

Like if you have a lighting strike damage or you have a heavy storm or something like that, then that can accelerate the damage, turning it into a critical damage. So you should still keep your leading edge in, in shape. If you want to do to, to minimize your cost, you should still repair it before it becomes structural.

Allen Hall: Okay. So the blades I have seen where they actually have holes in the leading edge, that’s a big problem just because of contamination and water ingress and yeah, lightning obviously be another one. So that should be repaired immediately. Is is that the, do we treat it like a cat four or cat five when that happens?

Or how, what? How are we thinking about that?

Morten Handberg: Maximum cat, cat four, even, even in those circumstances because it is a, it is a severe issue, but it’s not critical on, on its own. So I would not treat it as a cat five where you need to stop [00:20:00] the turbine, stuff like that. Of course, you do want, you don’t want to say, okay, let’s wait on, let’s wait for a year or so before we repair it.

You know, do plan, you know, with some urgency to get it fixed, but it’s not something where you need to, you know, stubble works and then get that done. You know, the blade can survive it for, for a period of time, but you’re just. Susceptible to other risks, I would say.

Allen Hall: Alright. So in in today’s world, there’s a lot of options, uh, to select from in terms of leading edge protection.

What are some of the leading candidates? What, what are some of the things that are actually working out in the field?

Morten Handberg: What we typically do, uh, when we’re looking at leading edge erosion, we’re looking at the, the raw data from the wind farm. Seeing how, how bad is it and how long have the wind farm been operated without being repaired?

So we get a sense of the aggressiveness of the erosion and. Um, if we have reliable weather data, we can also do some modeling to see, okay, what is the, what is the, the, uh, environmental conditions? Also, just to get a sense, is this [00:21:00] material driven fatigue or is it actually rain erosion driven fatigue?

Because if the, if the coating quality was not, was not very good, if the former lead leading edge, it was not applied very, very, very good, then, you know, you still get erosion really fast. You get surface defects that, uh, that trigger erosion. So that’s very important to, to, to have a look at. But then when we’ve established that, then we look at, okay, where do we have the, the, the, uh, the structural erosion zone?

So that means in what, in what part of the BA would you be at risk of getting structural damage? That’s the part where that you want to protect at all costs. And in that, I would look at either shell solution or high duty, um, put urethane coating something that has a a long durability. But then you also need to look at, depending on whether you want to go for coating or shell, you need to look at what is your environmental condition, what is your, you know, yeah.

Your environmental conditions, because you also wanna apply it without it falling off again. Uh, and if you have issues with [00:22:00] high humidity, high temperatures, uh, then a lot of the coatings will be really difficult to process or, you know, to, to. Uh, to handle in the field. And, you know, and if you don’t, if you don’t get that right, then you just might end up with a lot of peeling coating or uh, peeling shells.

Um, so it’s very important to understand what is your environmental conditions that you’re trying to do repairs in. And that’s also why we try not to recommend, uh, these shell repairs over the entire, out a third of the blade. Because you’re, you’re just putting up a lot of risk for, for, uh, for detaching blades if you put on too high, um, uh, how do you say, high height, sea of solutions.

Allen Hall: Yeah. So I, I guess it does matter how much of the blade you’re gonna cover. Is there a general rule of thumb? Like are we covering the outer 10%, outer 20%? What is the. What is that rule of thumb?

Morten Handberg: Typically, you know, you, you get a long way by somewhere between the outer four to six meters. Um, so that would [00:23:00]probably equivalate to the, out of the outer third.

That would likely be something between the outer 10 to 15 to 20% at max. Um, but, but it is, I, I mean, instead of looking at a percentage, I usually look at, okay, what can we see from the data? What does that tell us? And we can see that from the progression of the erosion. Because you can clearly see if you have turbines that’s been operating, what part of the blade has already, you know, exposed laminate.

And where do you only have a light abrasion where you only have a light abrasion, you can just continue with, and with the, with, with the general coating, you don’t need to go for any high tier solutions. And that’s also just to avoid applying, applying something that is difficult to process because it will just end up, that it falls off and then you’re worse off than, than before actually.

Allen Hall: Right. It’s about mitigating risk at some level. On a repair,

Morten Handberg: reducing repair cost. Um, so, so if you, if you look at your, your conditions of your blades and then select a solution that is, that is right for that part of [00:24:00] the blade

Allen Hall: is the best way to repair a blade up tower or down tower is what is the easiest, I guess what’s easier, I know I’ve heard conflicting reports about it.

A lot of people today, operators today are saying we can do it up tower. It’s, it’s pretty good that way. Then I hear other operators say, no, no, no, no, no. The quality is much better if the blade is down on the ground. What’s the recommendation there?

Morten Handberg: In general, it can be done up tower. Um, it is correct if you do a down tower, the quality is better, but that, that, that means you need to have a crane on standby to swap out blades.

Uh, and you should have a spare set of blades that you can swap with. Maybe that can work. Um. But I would say in general, the, your, your, your, your cheaper solution and your more, you know, you know, uh, would be to do up tower. And if, and again, if you do your, your, your homework right and, and selecting the right, uh, products for, for your [00:25:00] local environments, then you can do up tower then leading it, erosion.

Not something that you need to, you should not need to consider during a down tower. Unless you are offshore in an environment where you only have, uh, 10 repair days per year, then you might want to look at something else. But again, if we talk for offs for onshore, I would, I would always go for up, up tower.

I, I don’t, I don’t really see the need for, for, for taking the blades down.

Allen Hall: So what is the optimum point in a blaze life where a leading edge coating should be applied? Like, do you let it get to the point where you’re doing structural repairs or. When you start to see that first little bit of chipping, do you start taking care of it then there I, there’s gotta be a sweet spot somewhere in the middle there.

Where is that?

Morten Handberg: There is sweet spot. So the sweet spot is as soon as you have exposed laminate, because from exposed laminate, uh, the repair cost is exactly the same as if it was just, you know, uh, a light abrasion of the coating because the, the, the time to, to, um, prepare the [00:26:00] surface to apply the coating is exactly the same.

From, you know, from, from, from light surface damage to exposed laminate. That is the same, that is the same repair cost. But as soon as you have a structural damage to your blade, then you have to do a structural repair first, and then you’re, you’re multiplying the repair time and your repair cost. So that is the right point in time.

The way to, to determine when that is, is to do inspections, annual inspections, if you do 10% of your wind farm per year. Then you would know why, what, how the rest of your wind farm looks like because erosion is very uniform across the wind farm. Maybe there are some small deviations, but if you do a subset, uh, then, then you would have a good basic understanding about what erosion is.

You don’t need to do a full sweep of the, of the wind farm to know, okay, now is my right time to do repairs.

Allen Hall: Okay, so you’re gonna have a, a couple years notice then if you’re doing drone inspections. Hopefully you put, as you put your blades up, doing a drone inspection maybe on the ground so you [00:27:00] have a idea of what you have, and then year one, year two, year three, you’re tracking that progression across at least a sampling of the wind farm.

And then, then you can almost project out then like year five, I need to be doing something and I need to be putting it into my budget.

Morten Handberg: When you start to see the first minor areas of exposed laminate. Then the year after, typically then you would have a larger swat of, of laminated exposure, still not as structural.

So when you start to see that, then I would say, okay, next year for next year’s budget, we should really do repairs. It’s difficult when you just direct the wind farm, maybe have the first year of inspection. It’s difficult to get any, any kind of, you know, real sense of what is the, you know, what is the where of scale that we have.

You can be off by a factor of two or three if, you know, if, um, so I would, I would give it a few years and then, uh, then, then, then see how things progresses before starting to make, uh, plans for repairs. If you [00:28:00] don’t have any leading edge erosion protection installed from the start. I would say plan, at least for year, year five, you should expect that you need to go out, do and do a repair.

Again, I don’t have a crystal ball for every, you know, that’s good enough to predict for every wind farm in the world, but that would be a good starting point. Maybe it’s year three, maybe it’s year seven, depending on your local conditions. That is, but then at least you know that you need to do something.

Allen Hall: Well, there’s been a number of robotic, uh, applications of rain erosion coatings. Over the last two, three years. So now you see several different, uh, repair companies offering that. What does the robotic approach have to its advantage versus technicians on ropes?

Morten Handberg: Obviously robots, they don’t, they don’t, uh, get affected by how good the morning coffee was, what the latest conversation with the wife was, or how many hours of sleep it got.

There is something to, with the grown operator, uh, you know how good they are. But it’s more about how well, uh, [00:29:00] adjusted the, the controls of the, of the, the robot or the drone is in its application. So in principle, the drone should be a lot better, uh, because you can, it will do it the right, the same way every single time.

What it should at least. So in, so in principle, if you, you, you, when we get there, then the leading it then, then the robot should be, should outmatch any repair technician in, in the world. Because repair technician, they’re really good. They’re exceptionally good at what they do. The, the, the far majority of them, but they’re, they’re still people.

So they, you know, anyone, you know, maybe standing is not a hundred percent each time, maybe mixing of. Um, of materials and they’re much better at it than I am. So no question there. But again, that’s just real reality. So I would say that the, the, the draw, the robots, they should, uh, they should get to a point at some, at some point to that they will, they will be the preferable choice, especially for this kind of, this kind of repair.

Allen Hall: What should [00:30:00] operators be budgeting to apply a coating? Say they’re, you know, they got a new wind farm. It’s just getting started. They’re gonna be five years out before they’re gonna do something, but they, they probably need to start budgeting it now and, and have a scope on it. ’cause it’s gonna be a capital campaign probably.

How much per turbine should they be setting aside?

Morten Handberg: I would just, as a baseline, at least set aside 20,000 per per blade

Allen Hall: dollars or a Corona

Morten Handberg: dollars.

Allen Hall: Really. Okay.

Morten Handberg: Assuming that you actually need to do a repair campaign, I would say you’re probably ending up in that region again. I can be wrong with by a factor of, you know, uh, by several factors.

Uh, but, um, but I would say that as a starting point, we don’t know anything else. I would just say, okay, this should be the, the, the, the budget I would go for, maybe it’ll be only 10 because we have a lesser campaign. Maybe it will be twice because we have severe damages. So we need just to, to, to source a, um, a high end, uh, LEP solution.

Um, so, so [00:31:00] again, that would just be my starting point, Alan. It’s not something that I can say with accuracy that will go for every single plate, but it would be a good starting point.

Allen Hall: Well, you need to have a number and you need to be, get in the budget ahead of time. And so it, it’s a lot easier to do upfront than waiting till the last minute always.

Uh, and it is the future of leading edge erosion and protection products. Is it changing? Do you see, uh, the industry? Winning this battle against erosion.

Morten Handberg: I see it winning it because we do have the technology, we do have the solutions. So I would say it’s compared to when we started looking at it in 14, where, you know, we had a lot of erosion issues, it seems a lot more manageable.

Now, of course, if you’re a, if you’re a new owner, you just bought a wind farm and you’re seeing this for this first time, it might not be as manageable. But as an, as an industry, I would say we’re quite far. In understanding erosion, what, how it develops and what kind of solutions that that can actually, uh, withstand it.

We’re still not there in [00:32:00] terms of, uh, quality in, in repairs, but that’s, um, but, but, uh, I, I think technology wise, we are, we are in a really good, good place.

Allen Hall: All the work that has been done by DTU and RD test systems for creating a rain erosion test. Facility and there’s several of those, more than a dozen spread around the world at this point.

Those are really making a huge impact on how quickly the problem is being solved. Right? Because you’re just bringing together the, the, the brain power of the industry to work on this problem.

Morten Handberg: They have the annual erosion Symposium and that has been really a driving force and also really put DTU on the map in terms of, uh, leading edge erosion, understanding that, and they’re also trying to tie, tie it in with lightning, uh, because, uh.

If you have a ro, if you have erosion, that changes your aerodynamics. That in fact changes how your LPS system works. So, so there is also some, some risks in that, uh, that is worth considering when, when, when discussing [00:33:00]repairs. But I think these of you, they’ve done a tremendous amount of work and r and d system have done a lot of good work in terms of standardizing the way that we do rain erosion testing, whether or not we can then say with a hundred uncertainty that this, uh, this test will then match with.

With, um, how say local environment conditions, that’s fine, but we can at least test a DP systems on, on the same scale and then use that to, to, to look at, well how, how good would they then ferry in in the, um, out out in the real world.

Allen Hall: Yeah, there’s a lot too leading edge erosion and there’s more to come and everybody needs to be paying attention to it.

’cause it, it is gonna be a cost during the lifetime of your wind turbines and you just need to be prepared for it. Mor how do people get ahold of you to learn more about leading edge erosion and, and some of the approaches to, to control it?

Morten Handberg: Well, you can always re reach me, uh, on my email, meh, at wind power.com or on my LinkedIn, uh, page and I would strongly advise, you know, reach out if you have any concerns regarding erosion or you need support with, um, [00:34:00] uh, with blade maintenance strategies, uh, we can definitely help you out with that.

Or any blade related topic that you might be concerned about for your old local wind farm.

Allen Hall: Yes. If you have any blade questions or leading edge erosion questions, reach out to Morton. He’s easy to get ahold of. Thank you so much for being back on the podcast. We love having you. It

Morten Handberg: was fantastic being here.

Cheers. A.

Morten Handberg Breaks Down Leading Edge Erosion

Continue Reading

Renewable Energy

Who Decides What is Good and Bad?

Published

on

Is this really a problem? We can all agree that adequate food and housing are good things, and that hunger and homelessness are bad.

Who Decides What is Good and Bad?

Continue Reading

Renewable Energy

How Businesses Can Profit from Installing EV Chargers in 2026

Published

on

Instead of reacting to the next power bill shock, many Australian businesses are starting to think forward.

Every day, more and more Australian companies are asking a simple question we all seek an answer to: How can we reduce energy costs without compromising performance?

Well, for many, the answer lies in commercial solar power, and Cyanergy is one of the Australian companies helping businesses take that step with confidence.

With hands-on experience delivering commercial solar solutions across a wide range of industries, from farms and sporting clubs to breweries and large manufacturing facilities, Cyanergy’s real-world projects demonstrate how tailored solar systems can transform energy usage and significantly reduce operating expenses.

In this blog, we’ll explore what commercial solar power is, why it matters today, and how Cyanergy’s real-world case studies illuminate the path to a cleaner, more profitable energy future, both financially and environmentally

Let’s get into it!

What Are Commercial Solar Solutions? |Why does this matter?

Solar solutions for commercial applications are photovoltaic (PV) systems designed to meet the energy needs of businesses, large facilities, and organizations. This system often consumes much more power than residential households.

Commercial solar systems typically include:

  • Solar PV panels that capture sunlight and convert it to electricity
  • Inverters and electrical integration are used to convert DC to usable AC power
  • Monitoring and performance systems are installed to track energy generation
  • Optional battery storage to support energy autonomy and peak demand management

Unlike residential solar, commercial systems are scaled to handle larger loads and are often optimized for financial return, corporate sustainability goals, and energy independence.

Why Australian Businesses Are Turning to Solar Now?

Throughout the world, many companies are adopting solar power for several compelling reasons. It is already proven
that solar can:

  1. Reduce Operational Costs
  2. Electricity prices are volatile and often increasing worldwide. Incorporating a solar panel helps businesses lock
    in
    energy cost savings by
    producing electricity on-site rather than relying exclusively on grid power.

  3. Strong Financial Returns
  4. Commercial solar systems can pay back their investment in just a few years, far shorter than the 25 to 30 years
    the
    panels last. This ultimately means, after that, you are left with decades of essentially free electricity.

  5. Sustainability and Brand Value
  6. Customers, employees, and stakeholders increasingly value organizations that visibly commit to environmental
    responsibility.

  7. Energy Security
  8. Generating power locally reduces reliance on external sources and grid outages, a huge advantage for businesses
    with
    continuous operations.

    This mix of economic, environmental, and operational benefits makes commercial solar a smart choice for
    forward-looking organizations and commercial
    property
    owners
    .

4 Proven Solutions Through Real Case Studies by Cyanergy

To understand how these benefits play out in real situations, let’s dive into several commercial solar projects executed by Cyanergy. These case studies show diverse applications of solar power and tangible outcomes for different kinds of businesses.

1. Kew Golf Club (VIC): Sporting Facility Goes Solar

At a local golf club that relied on consistent electricity for lighting, clubhouse operations, and course facilities, Cyanergy installed an 88 kW commercial solar system to reduce costs.

Key Results

  • Payback period: around 63 months (5 years)
  • Annual savings: $26,165, a 50% drop in electricity costs
  • Energy generated per year: 141 MWh

This project demonstrates that not only industrial property but also community-oriented facilities can benefit greatly from solar power.

Beyond cost savings, the golf club also reinforced its commitment to sustainability, attracting eco-conscious members and reducing its carbon footprint.

Why This Matters?

Solar is not limited to manufacturing or heavy industry. In Australia, many Sports clubs, community centres, and similar facilities often have high energy use during peak daylight hours, which can be supported by solar.

2. Sparacino Farms: Where Agriculture Meets Solar Innovation!

Whether for irrigation, cooling, processing, or storage, agricultural operations have faced rising energy costs for a long time.

Similarly, Sparacino Farm was suffering from high electricity costs. For this family-run farm, Cyanergy implemented a 99.76 kW solar system that revolutionised their energy expenses.

Project Highlights

  • Electricity cost dropped: from $48,000 to $12,000 per year
  • Monthly savings: roughly $3,000
  • Payback period: 30 months (2.5 years)
  • Annual clean energy production: 87 MWh

This dramatic turnaround showcases how rural and agricultural businesses can achieve some of the fastest returns on solar investments.

In environments where a roof, sunlight, or a shed space is available, solar becomes both a strategic and practical choice.

The Sparacino farms example proves that solar isn’t just an environmental sustainability, it’s a core business decision that can significantly improve margins.

3. Philter Brewing: Crafting Sustainability

Sustainability often aligns naturally with brand identity, and for Philter Brewing, this was a perfect match.

With the help of Cyanergy, the brand installed an 86 kW system to slash power costs and support green operations.

Project Impact

  • Annual energy generated: 99 MWh
  • Annual savings: $29,130, cutting electricity costs from $81,900 to $52,770
  • Payback period: 45 months (3.75 years)

The brewery not only reduced operating expenses but also strengthened its reputation as an environmentally conscious brand, a powerful differentiator in a competitive market.

4. Uniplas Mouldings International: Heavy Industry Solar Success

In one of Cyanergy’s most impactful case studies, a large industrial manufacturer significantly transformed its energy profile with solar. And that’s Uniplas Mouldings International!

Project Features

  • Total installed solar: 490 kW, executed in staged phases
  • Timeline: Stage 1 (200 kW) completed in just 4 weeks
  • Subsidy optimisation: Accessed three sets of government incentives
  • Payback period: as short as 37 months
  • Annual generation: 752 MWh
  • Energy cost savings: Lowered from $647,000 to $456,000 per year

Big industrial energy users can unlock dramatic operational savings with solar, saving hundreds of thousands of dollars a year while achieving rapid ROI that justifies investment sooner, without delay.

Beyond Case Studies: Cyanergy’s Approach to Commercial Solar

Across all these projects, Cyanergy’s methodology shares some common themes that contribute to success:

1. Customized System Design

We all know that no two energy profiles are identical, whether it’s a golf club or a manufacturing plant.

At Cyanergy, we design systems tailored to the business’s actual energy usage, site orientation, and financial goals. So you don’t have to worry about adding a solar solution.

2. Financial Optimization

From government incentives to financial investment planning, Cyanergy helps businesses structure their solar projects to reduce upfront costs and improve payback timelines.

3. End-to-End After-Sale Support

Proper solar implementation requires more than panels; it requires site assessment, design, installation coordination, monitoring, and performance guarantee.

At Cyanergy, we support clients at every step, from early energy audits to post-installation support.

4. Monitoring and Reporting

Tracking system performance and energy generation ensures ongoing optimization and confidence in the investment.

Our real-time monitoring tools empower business owners to understand exactly how solar contributes to their bottom line.

The Transformative Role of Solar in Business Strategy

The benefits of commercial solar extend far beyond the energy generated or the energy cost that’s reduced. Overall, solar is a strategic business asset that impacts:

Profitability: Lower operating costs mean more available working capital, whether for reinvestment, dividends, or growth initiatives.

Resilience: Energy independence provides a hedge against market volatility in electricity pricing.

Sustainability Credentials: Solar investments signal that your organization is serious about environmental stewardship, which is crucial to investors, customers, and regulators alike.

Employee and Community Engagement: A company that commits to clean energy signals a long-term vision, strengthening morale and community trust.

Takeaway Thoughts

Cyanergy’s real case studies show how businesses from farms to breweries to industrial giants have harnessed solar to cut costs, stabilize operations, and enhance sustainability.

Whether your organization is exploring its first solar project or looking to scale existing efforts, the data is clear: smart solar investment delivers measurable ROI and long-term value.

As energy dynamics continue to evolve, solar power will become increasingly relevant, and companies that act now will secure economic and environmental advantages for years to come.

So, it’s time for you to take the next move! For more information, contact us today and win a free solar quote!

Your Solution Is Just a Click Away

The post How Businesses Can Profit from Installing EV Chargers in 2026 appeared first on Cyanergy.

https://cyanergy.com.au/blog/how-businesses-can-profit-from-installing-ev-chargers-in-2026/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com