Bottom slamming on heaving point absorber wave energy devices

Oscillating point absorber buoys may rise out of the water and be subjected to bottom slamming upon re-entering the water. Numerical simulations are performed to estimate the power absorption, the impact velocities and the corresponding slamming forces for various slamming constraints. Three buoy sh...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of marine science and technology 2010-06, Vol.15 (2), p.119-130
Main Authors: De Backer, Griet, Vantorre, Marc, Frigaard, Peter, Beels, Charlotte, De Rouck, Julien
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Absorption
Automotive Engineering
Buoyancy
Buoys
Computer simulation
Criteria
Devices
Emergence
Engineering
Engineering Design
Engineering Fluid Dynamics
Hemispheres
Marine
Mathematical models
Mechanical Engineering
Naval engineering
Numerical analysis
Offshore Engineering
Original Article
Peak load
Risk
Simulation
Slamming
Wave energy
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Oscillating point absorber buoys may rise out of the water and be subjected to bottom slamming upon re-entering the water. Numerical simulations are performed to estimate the power absorption, the impact velocities and the corresponding slamming forces for various slamming constraints. Three buoy shapes are considered: a hemisphere and two conical shapes with deadrise angles of 30° and 45°, with a waterline diameter of 5 m. The simulations indicate that the risk of rising out of the water is largely dependent on the buoy draft and sea state. Although associated with power losses, emergence occurrence probabilities can be significantly reduced by adapting the control parameters. The magnitude of the slamming load is severely influenced by the buoy shape. The ratio between the peak impact load on the hemisphere and that on the 45° cone is approximately 2, whereas the power absorption is only 4–8% higher for the 45° cone. This work illustrates the need to include slamming considerations aside from power absorption criteria in the buoy shape design process and the control strategy.
ISSN:0948-4280
1437-8213
DOI:10.1007/s00773-010-0083-0