TurboparkGaussian - small differences relative to Orsted example case

[mr483]

In addition to the example test case for TurboparkGaussian created by @JasperShell, I wanted to add a comparison with Orsted's provided example #1 (https://github.com/OrstedRD/TurbOPark/blob/main/TurbOParkExamples.pdf).

In doing this, I notice there are some small discrepancies, which I haven't yet been able to explain.

The test case is a simple 4x4 layout:

with a 2.5MW turbine:

It uses a reference height of 90m, while the turbine is 100m, with a shear coefficient of 0.1. Three wind speeds are tested, each with a different corresponding TI.

The results I find are below:

Of course the scaling is a bit deceptive there, so I also include all three cases compared on the same plot:

The comparison is still reasonably close, but we see that in terms of velocity, there is larger error with the 14 m/s inflow which I haven't been able to explain. I double-checked the thrust curve relative to the reference. I increased the grid resolution as well to 10, but results are essentially equivalent (as expected). Any other thoughts what might be going on here?

The pywake comparison against the same example seems to match quite precisely at all wind speeds:
https://topfarm.pages.windenergy.dtu.dk/PyWake/notebooks/literature_verification/TurbOPark.html

Attached are my script and necessary data.

orsted_example_and_data.zip

This was all done with FLORIS v4.6