Round Robin Testing: Exploring Experimental Uncertainties through a Multifacility Comparison of a Hinged Raft Wave Energy Converter
Ver/ Abrir
Registro completo
Mostrar el registro completo DCAutoría
Davey, Thomas; Sarmiento Martínez, Javier; Ohana, Jérémy; Thiebaut, Florent; Haquin, Sylvain; Weber, Matthieu; Gueydon, Sebastien; Judge, Frances; Lyden, Eoin; Gabl. Roman; Jordan, Laura-Beth; Hann, Martyn; Wang, Daming; Collins, Keri; Conley, Daniel; Greaves, Deborah; Ingram, David M.; Murphy, Jimmy; O´Shea, MichaelFecha
2021Derechos
Attribution 4.0 International.© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution( CC BY) license.
Publicado en
Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2021, 9, 9, 946
Editorial
MDPI
Enlace a la publicación
Palabras clave
Wave energy converter
Tank testing
Comparison
Irregular waves
Resumen/Abstract
ABSTRACT: The EU H2020 MaRINET2 project has a goal to improve the quality, robustness and accuracy of physical modelling and associated testing practices for the offshore renewable energy sector. To support this aim, a round robin scale physical modelling test programme was conducted to deploy a common wave energy converter at four wave basins operated by MaRINET2 partners. Test campaigns were conducted at each facility to a common specification and test matrix, providing the unique opportunity for intercomparison between facilities and working practices. A nonproprietary hinged raft, with a nominal scale of 1:25, was tested under a set of 12 irregular sea states. This allowed for an assessment of power output, hinge angles, mooring loads, and six-degree-of-freedom motions. The key outcome to be concluded from the results is that the facilities performed consistently, with the majority of variation linked to differences in sea state calibration. A variation of 5?10% in mean power was typical and was consistent with the variability observed in the measured significant wave heights. The tank depth (which varied from 2?5 m) showed remarkably little influence on the results, although it is noted that these tests used an aerial mooring system with the geometry unaffected by the tank depth. Similar good agreement was seen in the heave, surge, pitch and hinge angle responses. In order to maintain and improve the consistency across laboratories, we make recommendations on characterising and calibrating the tank environment and stress the importance of the device?facility physical interface (the aerial mooring in this case).
Colecciones a las que pertenece
- D56 Artículos [240]
- D56 Proyectos de Investigación [142]