Details on the Hydrodynamic Performance Quality (HPQ) Metric

The Hydrodynamic Performance Quality (HPQ) of a Wave Energy Converter (WEC) Technology

By Diana Bull, Sandia National Laboratories

The two components that comprise the Average Climate Capture Width per Characteristic Capital Expenditure (ACE) metric are the most important levelized cost of energy (LCOE) drivers for WEC devices, however there are many other influential parameters. Although a scaled wave tank test cannot provide information on all influential parameters (system availability, installation, etc.), it can provide substantial useful information beyond ACE.

ACE requires knowledge of the power absorbed by the device in a West Coast deployment climate and the Characteristic Capital Expenditure needed to build the device. By requiring additional sensors to monitor other aspects of the devices performance, processing the data to obtain alternative views beyond averages, and subjecting the devices to additional wave environments, much more can be learned about a device’s overall performance. In addition to monitoring averaged absorbed power, the devices will be outfitted with sensors that measure mooring forces, accelerations, and the position of the device. This data will be processed to reveal statistically significant peak values, ratios between peaks and means, as well as identifying events like end-stop impacts. Lastly, all of the sensors and processing will occur not only for the irregular wave spectra used to establish average climate capture width (ACCW), but also for two large irregular wave spectra (LIWS) and two realistic wind swell spectra (RWS).

This additional data will be processed into six performance-related quantities for each device tested in the MASK basin. These performance-related quantities are:

  • Statistical peak of mooring watch circle (WCHPQ)
  • Statistical peak of mooring forces (MFHPQ)
  • Statistical peak-to-average ratio of absorbed power (APP2A,HPQ)
  • End-stop impact events (ESHPQ)
  • Absorbed power in realistic seas (RSHPQ)
  • Adaptive control effort (ACHPQ)

These quantities relate to aspects of the techno-economic performance not addressed by ACE and will allow devices to distinguish themselves on more levels then the ACE metric alone provides.

Each of these hydrodynamic performance-related quantities will be allocated to a factor (in the range of 0.94 – 1.06) and the HPQ of a device will be established by multiplying the ACE metric by the factors allocated to each performance-related quantity.

HPQ = ACE * ( MFHPQ * WCHPQ * APP2A,HPQ * ESHPQ * RSHPQ * ACHPQ )

Each of these factors may have limited beneficial, non-beneficial or no influence on the HPQ. The allocation of the factors from the performance-related quantities will be the responsibility of the judging panel.

The HPQ will establish that the winners’ designs will more effectively address key aspects of the techno-economic performance. The HPQ continues to encourage teams towards a systems-level engagement through the end of the competition. At the end, the device with the highest HPQ that has surpassed the ACE threshold will be declared the winner of the Wave Energy Prize.

Advertisements

Thank You For Registering

Thank you for registering!

Wave Energy Prize official registered teams represent established companies in the wave energy space, industry newcomers, inventors and universities, and they come from many U.S. states and territories.

Official registered teams are:

  • 40South Energy (Palo Alto, Calif.)
  • AdapWave (Baltimore, Md.)
  • Advanced Ocean Energy @ Virginia Tech (Hampton Roads, Va.)
  • AIMMER Marine Energy (Oakland, Calif.)
  • Alternative Energy Engineering Associates (Port Orchard, Wash.)
  • Aqua-Shift (Encinitas, Calif).
  • AquaHarmonics (Oakland, Calif.)
  • ATA Engineering (San Diego, Calif.)
  • Atargis Energy Corporation (Pueblo, Colo.)
  • Atlantic Wavepower Partnership (Newport, R.I.)
  • Atlas Ocean Systems (Houston, Texas)
  • AWECS Attenuator (Glen Burnie, Md.)
  • Brimes Energy (Holbrook, N.Y.)
  • Buoyant Energy (Cambridge, Mass.)
  • Cal Poly – Protean Wave Energy, Inc. (San Luis Obispo, Calif.)
  • CalWave (Berkeley, Calif.)
  • Centipod (Santa Barbara, Calif.)
  • Crestwing (Denmark)
  • Earth By Design (Bend, Ore.)
  • eBuoy (Ayer, Mass.)
  • Energystics (Stony Brook, N.Y.)
  • Enorasy Labs (Bedford, Mass.)
  • EnSea, Inc. (San Francisco, Calif.)
  • ESI – Perpetuwave (Doral, Fla.)
  • Etymol Ocean Power (Winter Springs, Fla.)
  • Fetzer Wave (Palm Harbor, Fla.)
  • Float Inc. – BergerABAM (San Diego, Calif.)
  • GlobalOne Sciences (Dayton, Ohio)
  • Greenfield Technologies LLC (Addison, Ala.)
  • GyroGenTM (Bloomfield Hills, Mich.)
  • Healy’s Wave Energy Converter (Hollis, N.H.)
  • Hui Nalu (Honolulu, Hawaii)
  • Hydrokinetic Energy Solutions (Sunnyvale, Calif.)
  • Iowec (Cambridge, Mass.)
  • James F. Marino (San Diego, Calif.)
  • Jetty Joule (Colusa, Calif.)
  • KNSwing (Denmark)
  • Kozoriz-Franklin California Maglev, Inc. (Long Beach, Calif.)
  • KymoGen (Bristol, Conn.)
  • Leviathan Energy Waves (Stony Brook, N.Y.)
  • M3 Wave (Salem, Ore.)
  • MARUTHI POWER (Cleveland, Ohio)
  • Mighty Waves Energy Team (Vienna, Va.)
  • Mocean Energy (Annapolis, Md.)
  • Neptune Wave Power, LLC (Dallas, Texas)
  • Next Gen (Sacramento, Calif.)
  • NM-AGGIE Waves (Las Cruces, N.M.)
  • Ocean Energy USA (Sacramento, Calif.)
  • Ocean Kinetics (Homer, Alaska)
  • Ocean Lab (Glendale, Calif.)
  • Ocean Motion International (Denver, Colo.)
  • Oscilla Power (Seattle, Wash.)
  • Ovsiankin Energy Group (Chicago, Ill.)
  • Poseidon’s Kite (Gambrills, Md.)
  • Principle Power (Berkeley, Calif.)
  • Protean Wave Technology Inc. (San Juan, Puerto Rico)
  • ReWEB Technology (Narragansett, R.I.)
  • Rohan Patel (Bensalem, Pa.)
  • Royal Wave (Paonia, Colo.)
  • RPPC (Denver, Colo.)
  • RTI-MIT Wave Power (York, Maine)
  • Rutgers Wave Power (Piscataway, N.J.)
  • SAi Orbit Wave Power (Daphne, Ala.)
  • Sea Potential (Bristol, R.I.)
  • SeaFoil (Redwood City, Calif.)
  • SeaGreen Technologies (Annapolis, Md.)
  • SeaStar Ocean (Los Angeles, Calif.)
  • SEWEC (Redwood City, Calif).
  • Spindrift Energy (Simi Valley, Calif.)
  • Super Watt Wave Catcher Barge Team (Houston, Texas)
  • TAMU-OSSL (College Station, Texas)
  • Team FLAPPER (Research Triangle Park, N.C.)
  • Team Treadwater (Houston, Texas)
  • Thrustcycle Enterprises (Wilsonville, Ore.)
  • Undulational Harvester (Albany, Calif.)
  • Uniturbine Corporation (Lewes, Del.)
  • Vortex (Lenox, Mass.)
  • Wave Energy at Virginia Tech (Blacksburg, Va.)
  • Wave Energy Conversion Corporation of America (WECCA) (North Bethesda, Md.)
  • Wave Forest Power (Benton, Ky.)
  • Wave Water Works (Northville, Mich.)
  • Wave Wheel (Gray, Maine)
  • Waveberg Development (San Diego, Calif.)
  • WaveFlex 1 (Baltimore, Md.)
  • WaveFlex 2 (Baltimore, Md.)
  • WaveFlo (Newburyport, Mass.)
  • Waves2Energy (Union, N.J.)
  • Waveswing America (Sacramento, Calif.)
  • Wavewatts (Aliso Viejo, Calif.)
  • Wavy Turbine (La Jolla, Calif.)
  • Wizards of Energy (Dania Beach, Fla.)
  • Worldwide Windfinder (Dallas, Texas)

An interactive Google map provides more detail on each team and can be accessed here.

Related: U.S. Department of Energy’s Wave Energy Prize to Include 92 Teams