# Wind Load Distribution in Float Photovoltaic System
## 4 Modeling Description
### Model Evaluation Strategy
From these conditions, the load transmitted to the foundation was predicted by considering the fluid characteristics of the wind load on the PV power plant. Figure 10 shows that the fluid flow was generated by dividing the flow field area into inlet and outlet, and the boundary of the side wall was given a resistance-free condition. For the inlet velocity, the boundary condition was the wind load under the normal speed. At the CFD analysis outlet pressure, an atmospheric pressure condition of 0 Pa was applied as the average static pressure condition. Since the objective of the analysis is the wind load on the power plant, the wind pressure at each PV module array was applied. In order to evaluate the characteristics of the wind flow over the PV module array and the behavior at the end of the array, the wind pressure data can be extracted from the center and end of the PV module array. Figure 8: Fluid analysis model. (**a**) Layout of floating PV power plant; (**b**) fluid boundary. Figure 9: Boundary condition for fluid analysis. (**a**) Forward direction wind load (\(\beta=0^{\circ}\)); (**b**) backward direction wind load (\(\beta=180^{\circ}\)). Figure 4:0 Distribution of wind speed for backward direction (\(\beta=180^{\circ}\)). (**a**) Wind speed of 36.2 m/s; (**b**) wind speed of 51.7 m/s; and (**c**) wind speed of 70.0 m/s. Figure 4:1 Velocity vector for forward direction (\(\beta=0^{\circ}\)). (**a**) Wind speed of 36.2 m/s; (**b**) wind speed of 51.7 m/s; and (**c**) wind speed of 70.0 m/s. As shown in Figure 11, as a result of forward direction analysis, it was confirmed that the one-array PV panel surface pressure increased as the inlet speed increased. As the wind quickly overflowed along the front of the solar module, a vortex was generated at the back of the first row, changing the angle of the wind incident on the solar module and causing the greatest wind pressure in the second row. In Figure 12, it is confirmed that the 10-array panel at the end generates a wind load that is about 52% lower than the wind load of the 10-array middle panel. From the wind speed distributions and vectors in Figures 11 and 12, it can be seen that the flow field region has dimensions about 15 times larger than the structural model, and judging from the wind load distribution, the wall boundary condition in the flow field region has a very small effect on the fluid behavior characteristics near the structural model. As shown in Figures 13 and 14, the wind from the forward and backward directions of the PV modules tends to decrease rapidly after the first row of PV module arrays is swept over. This means that the wind load on the PV modules decreases rapidly after the first row of PV modules is flown, which is characteristic of a fluid flowing over a certain obstacle. It was confirmed that a wind load difference of up to 26% occurred between the wind load acting in the rear direction and the wind load acting in the front direction, depending on the wind direction. The wind pressure along the array to check the pressure change at the center and end of the PV modules is presented in Figure 4:2 The horizontal axis is the array of PV modules  
Figure 4:3 Velocity vector for backward direction (\(\beta=180^{\circ}\)). (**a**) Wind speed of 36.2 m/s; (**b**) wind speed of 51.7 m/s; and (**c**) wind speed of 70.0 m/s. installation, and the largest wind pressure is generated because the first row resists most of the wind. In addition, it is predicted that a larger wind pressure force is applied to the PV modules installed in the center than the PV modules installed at the ends due to the interference effect of the wind flowing in the outer peripheral area.