Amendment No. 1 to RFX-2025-10021 - Fundamental Aerodynamics for Large Wind Turbine Performance and Reliability.pdf

National Renewable Energy Laboratory Managed and Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

Request for Proposals Number RFX-2025-10021

AMENDMENT NO. 1

“Fundamental Aerodynamics for Large Wind Turbine Performance and Reliability”

Amendment Issue Date: 03/07/25 Due Date for Proposals: 04/07/25 **Revised Time Due: 2:00 p.m. Mountain Time

Solicitation Type Best Value Selection Firm Fixed Price with Price Participation Subcontract

Submit offers to the NREL RFP Contact below

NREL RFP Contact Kyndall Jackson, Subcontract Administrator National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway, MS RSF 030 Golden, CO 80401 Email: Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

Amendment No. 1 is hereby issued in response to requests to extend the proposal submission due date.

NREL is granting an extension of three (3) weeks for a revised due date of April 7, 2025, at 2:00 pm Mountain Time. NREL believes an extension will result in an improvement in the quality of proposals.

A future date for the webinar regarding this solicitation is yet to be determined. An additional amendment will be issued once this information is known.

In addition, Amendment 01 is issued to provide a revised Attachment No. 1 - Statement of Work (Topic Area 1) and Attachment 1.A - NFAC Test Planning Additional Information. Content revisions are denoted in red text.

Amendment No. 1 is also hereby issued in response to questions received regarding the subject Request for Proposal (RFP) No. RFX-2025-10021. Please note that some questions may have been edited to address duplicate questions or to protect business-sensitive information provided in the original questions.

The essences of the original questions are not affected. Questions are in no particular order.

mailto:Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

General Questions

1. If our proposal includes multiple for-profit companies, is the in-kind cost share a total of 10% or is it 10% per partner?

NREL Response: 10% of the total proposed budget (across all for-profit entities or total project). For clarification on price participation, see the below revision to Section 4 of the RFP document:

A minimum price participation of 10% is required for each topic area. Price participation is defined as a percentage of the total allowable and allocable costs under this subcontract, which may be met by contributions by the offeror and/or by contributions from the offeror’s lower-tier offeror(s) or supplier(s) at no cost to NREL. The price participation requirement can also be met by in-kind contributions. All costs must be allowable and allocable under the terms of the Federal Acquisition Regulations and DOE Acquisitions Regulations. The price participation must come from non-federal sources unless otherwise allowed by law.

Offerors are encouraged to include any company-owned materials, supplies, or equipment in their price participation.

Price participation is not required for institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations. This waiver is granted per a determination made pursuant to 2 CFR 910.310(b)(2) that it is necessary and appropriate to eliminate the cost sharing requirement for institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations for this research and development activity. If an educational institution submits a proposal with non-university lower tier(s), price participation of 10% of the total overall value must be met. If the industrial partner is unable to provide the full amount, the university may make up the difference.

2. What is the limitation on participation in multiple proposals for a given institution?

NREL Response: None. Proposals for the two topic areas will be treated independently.

3. While education is not a priority for this solicitation, is the involvement of graduate student(s) permitted?

NREL Response: Yes, it will be the applicant’s responsibility to account for constraints in terms of access and presence in testing activities at US government facilities.

4. Is NREL open to issuing the award as a cost reimbursable type subcontract, where a Subcontractor is paid based on actual costs incurred, rather than a Firm Fixed Price, where a Subcontractor is paid based on a set negotiated value for completed deliverables, as stated in the RFP?

NREL Response: No, the award will be issued as a Firm Fixed Pirce with Price Participation subcontract.

5. Can this be a single PI effort or I have to be a part of a team. I saw a link for Teaming Partner List but how do I know whom to reach out to? Do I have to form the team myself?

NREL Response: Team composition is the applicant’s responsibility. A single organization proposal is as valid as a multi-organization one.

Topic Area 1 Questions

6. What will be the weight of targeting the additional quantities of interest (listed at the top of page 3 for Attachment 1 - SOW for Topic Aera 1) when the proposal is reviewed?

NREL Response: Beyond designating bullets 1 and 2 of additional quantities of interest as mandatory (primary and secondary) while 3 is not, NREL has not broken down ‘sub-weights’; the holistic quality and completeness of the proposal will drive scoring on the technical side.

7. Do the 3 million allocated to go directly to NFAC only cover the costs associated with theminimum required test matrix?

NREL Response: Yes

8. Is it correctly understood that for additional runs beyond the minimum required test matrix in

NFAC, we can cover the cost from the other 4.75 million? And for those extra tests, is it correctly understood that the cost is roughly $25,000 for 4 polars?

NREL Response: Yes

9. Our understanding is that the NFAC team will supply everything hardware wise needed to complete the baseline minimum test matrix other than the model itself (sensors etc.).

1.) Is this a correct reading and does this include ‘sensors’ that would be part of the model itself (e.g. the paint needed for PSP)?

2.) For unsteady surface pressures, does NFAC have kulites available? And if so, how many?

NREL Response: Appendix 1.A has been updated to have a more complete list of hardware;

no Kulites are available, and PSP at this experimental scale are not provided for in the baseline

10. Is there an update on the inflow turbulence characteristics for the NFAC 40’x80’ test section?

NREL Response: Yes; NFAC team has post-processed inflow characterization data to estimate length-scales in the test-section inflow; these have now been added to Appendix 1.A.

11. The requirements outline 3 airfoil thicknesses: 21%, 21%, and 30%. Given that the DU airfoil required for the test is 21%, can we use instead a modern 24% or 25% airfoil?

NREL Response: Yes, the SOW for Topic Area 1 has been modified to allow this for Modern Airfoil #1.

12. The requirements for airfoil selection mention that a modern airfoil can be one that is in a product released in 2015 or after. What is the definition of "Released" for this requirement? Could it be initial company public announcement of a product? Sales of that product in 2015 or onwards?

NREL Response: NREL’s goal is to facilitate as modern an airfoil dataset as feasible; so the definition of “release” can be met with evidence of public product announcement that uses said airfoils (or) first recorded sales in 2015.

13. If an applicant contributes low-Re. No. test data for an airfoil, can we assign value to that towards the cost share? Under the argument that the test does not need to happen from the available budget.

For example, the cost of testing in another wind tunnel and the value of the wind tunnel model.

NREL Response: No - but it will be a competitive advantage to prove airfoil quality/relevance and where that budget room is shown to result in better and more science.

14. Who will own the NFAC models after the test and therefore be responsible for their disposal/storage?

NREL Response: NREL

15. If an OEM pays for the manufacturing of a model for the secondary test and includes that in the cost-share, can the OEM be the owner of the model after the end of the project?

NREL Response: Yes - on the condition that these models will be shared with / available to NREL/DoE for use in future (open) R&D programs; details can be worked out in negotiation phase after awardees are selected.

16. Is the secondary test mandatory? If yes, is it necessary to test all 3 airfoil or just 1 airfoil?

NREL Response: Yes – secondary testing is mandatory. We would prefer all three airfoils to be tested but insist that testing for the two modern airfoils be treated as mandatory.

17. NREL role in the test at NFAC: What administrative and/or logistical support can we expect from

NREL?

NREL Response: NREL-led team will provide Program oversight and limited technical consulting assistance; no direct logistical support e.g., building or transporting test articles etc., is planned.

18. For Section 4.4 Secondary Wind Tunnel Testing and Research, is a scaled-down model testing accepted?

NREL Response: Yes.

Topic Area 2 Questions

19. Is there a preferred order of priority between the following cases?

a. Elastic blade testing in static conditions

b. Rigid Blade testing undergoing tailored motion For (a) and (b) above, what specific motion types are of interest?

Are there example motion profiles and motion parameters (e.g., pitch rate, surge rate) that could be used as references for experimental design?

What are the primary experimental measurements of interest? Is there a strong preference for advanced flow diagnostics, such as time-resolved PIV?

NREL Response: Above choices are to be made by applicants based on their team’s appreciation for the underlying problem, and their hypothesis on what test design and measurements would have the most useful impact.

20. How many awards are expected for Topic Area 2?

NREL Response: One

21. How will the collected data be utilized to improve industry design codes? Are there specific software tools (e.g., OpenFAST, AeroDyn) that require targeted validation?

NREL Response: Yes. These open data-sets will be used in validation of a range of modeling and simulation tools (governmental, academic and industry developed) to improve their fundamental physics capture capabilities.

22. Is there is a specific person (e.g., another e-mail or a phone number) who I can contact in regard to NFAC facility cost estimates, availability, and installation details for Topic Area?

NREL Response: Please reach out to Dr. Joe Sacco, NFAC Deputy Director at joseph.n.sacco@nasa.gov.

23. Does a proposal Topic Area 2 which included proposed NFAC testing require that NFAC provide a letter of commitment with a non-zero cost-sharing dollar amount?

NREL Response: No. NFAC does not need to provide a non-zero cost-sharing contribution.

24. For recipients of the $1.5M award for topic 2, Is there any guidance you can provide regarding how much of the total budget is typically allocated on the design and fabrication of the three test blade models?

NREL Response: For Topic Area 2 there is no requirement for 3 test blade models -that minimum testing is only for Topic Area 1.

As a reminder, each proposal must be submitted as an electronic PDF file by 2:00 p.m. Mountain Time on 04/07/25. Please send submissions to Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov.

Please include confirmation of receipt and acceptance of this Amendment in your cover letter.

Thank you for your interest in this project. We look forward to receiving your proposal!

mailto:Kyndall.Jackson@nrel.gov

Submit offers to the NREL RFP Contact below