Analyses of Wave Scattering and Absorption Produced by WEC Arrays: Physical/Numerical Experiments and Model Assessment
Knowledge of the effects of wave energy converters (WECs) on the near and far wave fields is critical to the efficient and low-risk design of waveforms. Several computational wave models enable the evaluation of WEC array effects, but model validation has been limited. In this chapter, we validate two popular models with very different formulations: the phase-resolving model WAMIT and the phase-averaged Simulating WAves Nearshore (SWAN) model. The models are validated against wave data from an extensive set of WEC array laboratory experiments conducted by Oregon State University and Columbia Power Technologies, Inc (CPT). The experimental WECs were 1:33 scale versions of a commercial device (CPT “Manta”), and several different WEC array configurations were subjected to a range of regular waves and random sea states. The wave field in the lee of the WEC arrays was mapped, and the wave shadow was quantified for all sea states. In addition, the WEC power capture performance was measured independently via a motion-tracking system and compared to the observed wave energy deficit (i.e., the wave shadow). Overall, WAMIT displays skill in predicting the wave field both in offshore and in the lee of the WEC arrays. WAMIT simulations demonstrate partial standing wave patterns that are consistent with the observations. These patterns are related to wave scattering processes, and their presence increases the magnitude of the wave shadow in the lee of WECs. The pattern is less pronounced at longer wave periods where WECs behave more like wave followers. In these situations, the wave shadow is primarily controlled by the WEC energy capture and less so by scattering. The SWAN model accounts for the frequency-dependent energy capture of the devices and performs well for cases when the wave shadow is primarily controlled by the WEC energy capture. For regular wave cases, inclusion of the wave diffraction process is necessary, but SWAN simulations for wave fields with frequency and directional spreading capture the general character of the wave shadow even without diffraction. Finally, we suggest that WECs designed to operate such that the expected significant wave energy lies at periods near, or larger than, the period of peak energy extraction will minimize the wave shadow effect for a given gross extraction of wave energy, which leads to more efficient arrays with respect to environmental impact.
KeywordsWave energy converters Arrays Wave scattering Point absorber
- Alexandre, A., Stallard, T., & Stansby, P. K. (2009). Transformation of wave spectra across a line of wave devices. Proceedings of the 8th European Wave and Tidal Energy Conference (EWTEC 2009).Google Scholar
- Ashton, I. G. C., Johanning, L., & Linfoot, B. (2009). Measurement of the effect of power absorption in the lee of a wave energy converter. Proceedings of OMAE 2009, OMAE2009–79793.Google Scholar
- Black, C., & Haller, M. C. (2013). Analysis of waves in the near-field of wave energy converter arrays through stereo video, Abstract: OS11C-1657. San Francisco, CA: AGU Fall Meeting.Google Scholar
- Choi, J, Lim, C. H., Lee, J. I. & Yoon S. B. (2009). Evolution of waves and currents over a submerged laboratory shoal. Coastal Engineering, Vol. 56, 297–312.Google Scholar
- Farley, F. J. M., (2011). Far-field theory of wave power capture by oscillating systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A:Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 370(1959), 278–287.Google Scholar
- Gonzalez-Santamaria, R., Zou, Q. P., & Pan, S. (2013). Impacts of a wave farm on waves, currents and coastal morphology in Southest England. Estuaries and Coasts, 1, 1–14.Google Scholar
- Haller, M. C., Porter, A., Lenee-Bluhm, P., Rhinefrank, K., Hammagren, E., Özkan-Haller, T. & Newborn, D. (2011). Laboratory observations of waves in the vicinity of WEC-arrays. Proceedings of European Wave and Tidal Energy Conference (EWTEC 2011), Paper No. 419.Google Scholar
- Holthuijsen, L., Herman, A. & Booij, N. (2003). Phase-decoupled refraction–diffraction for spectral wave models. Coastal Engineering, 49(4), 291–305.Google Scholar
- O’Dea, A., Haller, M. C. & Özkan-Haller, H. T. (2015). The impact of wave energy converter arrays on wave-induced forcing in the surf zone. Submitted to Renewable Energy.Google Scholar
- Porter, A. K., Haller, M. C. & Lenee-Bluhm, P. (2012). Laboratory observations and numerical modeling of the effects of an array of wave energy converters. Proceedings of 33rd ICCE 2012. Santander, Spain, doi:10.9753/icce.v33.management.67.
- Rhinefrank, K., et al. (2013). Benchmark Modeling of the Near-Field and Far-Field Wave Effects of Wave Energy Arrays, Columbia Power Technologies Final Report, DE-EE0002658, U.S. Dept. of Energy, www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1060889/.
- Silverthorne, K. E. & Folley, M. (2013). A new numerical representation of wave energy converters in a spectral wave model. Proceedings of the 10th European Wave and Tidal Energy Conference (EWTEC 2013).Google Scholar
- WAMIT, Inc., (2000). WAMIT user manual version 6.0, 6.0PC, 5.3S. Available from www.wamit.com.
- Waters, R., et al. (2007). Experimental results from sea trials of an offshore wave energy system. Applied Physics Letters, 90, 034105.Google Scholar
- Waters, R., et al. (2011). Ocean wave energy absorption in response to wave period and amplitude—Offshore experiments on a wave energy converter. IET Renewable Power Generation, 5(6), 465–469.Google Scholar
- Weller, S. D., Stallard, T. J. & Stansby, P. K. (2010). Experimental measurements of irregular wave interaction factors in closely spaced arrays. IET Renewable Power Generation, 4(6), 628–637.Google Scholar
- Zijlema, M. (2010). Computation of wind-wave spectra in coastal waters with SWAN on unstructured grids. Coastal Engineering, 57(3), 267–277.Google Scholar