From the Wave Energy Prize website: A question about ‘overtopping’

A university student from Texas writes:

“I read the ‘types of devices proposed by these teams include point absorbers, terminators, attenuators, oscillating water columns, and oscillating wave surge converters’ from your website. I am just reviewing some papers about WECs and found that there is another type of WEC which is called overtopping. My question is whether the overtopping type is less efficient so none of the top teams use it.”

(“WEC” means “Wave Energy Converter” or sometimes “Wave Energy Conversion.” It is common to say “WEC device” as well.)

To answer, the Wave Energy Prize provides an avenue to allow teams to develop innovative technologies that have the prospect for achieving a long-term impact of lowering the cost of electricity to make wave energy competitive with other means of generating power.  If someone came forward with a design for an “overtopping device” that shows promise achieving our overall program goal, as outlined in our Technology Performance Level (TPL)* assessment, then it may well have progressed in the competition.

To learn more about TPL, refer to “Details on the Technical Submission” written by Jochem Weber from National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL).

U.S. Department of Energy’s Wave Energy Prize Announces Finalist Teams

Meet the Wave Energy Prize Finalist Teams

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced Tuesday that nine teams have been named finalists in the Wave Energy Prize, a 20-month design-build-test competition, and will proceed to the next phase of the competition.

The nine finalists and two alternates, identified from the 17 remaining official qualified teams, will continue their quest to double the energy captured from ocean waves and win a prize purse totaling more than $2 million. Each of the finalists and alternates will now receive seed funding from DOE to develop 1/20th scale models of their wave energy converter (WEC). These models will be tested at the nation’s most advanced wave-making facility, the Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Maneuvering and Seakeeping (MASK) Basin at Carderock, Md., beginning in the summer of 2016.

Official finalist teams are:

Alternate teams are:

“The qualified teams’ efforts resulted in some very promising technologies for the judges to evaluate,” said Wes Scharmen, principal investigator at Ricardo, Inc. and chief judge of the Wave Energy Prize. “Based on our preliminary evaluation, the data indicates that many of the teams identified as finalists have the potential to achieve the ACE threshold, and thus the potential to exceed DOE’s program goal. We’re looking forward to further verifying their designs performance at 1/20th scale in the MASK Basin at Carderock this summer.”

ACE—a benefit-to-cost ratio—was selected by the Wave Energy Prize as a metric appropriate for comparing low Technology Readiness Level WEC concepts when there is not enough data to calculate the levelized cost of energy —itself a cost-to-benefit ratio—from a device. ACE is determined by dividing, in essence, the wave energy extraction efficiency of a WEC by its structural cost. Finalists were determined based on their potential to achieve the doubling of the current state-of-the-art ACE value of 1.5 meters per million dollars (m/$M) to 3 m/$M during 1/20th scale tank testing at the MASK Basin, making them eligible to win the grand prize.

A panel of expert judges evaluated each qualified team based on their revised technical submissions, numerical modeling results, Model Design and Construction Plans, and the results of small-scale tank testing of their 1/50th scale models, and determined aggregate scores to identify the finalist pool.

The Wave Energy Prize is encouraging the development of game-changing WECs that will reduce the cost of wave energy, making it more competitive with traditional energy solutions.

Congratulations to the finalist teams, and thanks to all who have participated in theWave Energy Prize to date!

Two Wave Energy Prize Qualified Teams Selected by DOE to Receive Share in $10.5 Million for a Separate WEC Survivability Funding Opportunity

The New Year started with some good news for M3 Wave LLC and Oscilla Power, Inc. as these Wave Energy Prize Qualified Teams were two of six organizations selected to receive a share of $10.5 million under the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Durability and Survivability funding opportunity. This funding, which is separate from the Wave Energy Prize, targets the advancement of marine and hydrokinetic (MHK) device durability and survivability, features—not being tested for in the Wave Energy Prize—that make devices withstand the harsh conditions encountered in real-world marine environments.

  • M3 Wave LLC, of Salem, Ore., is developing a wave energy converter that sits on the ocean floor and harnesses energy from the pressure waves beneath ocean waves. This project will develop modeling tools to explore ways to 1) minimize effects of sediment transport, effects such as water erosion, displacement, and tilting of the device; and to 2) increase the lifetime of their system by reducing maintenance requirements in commercial-scale deployments.
  • Oscilla Power, Inc., of Seattle, is developing a wave energy converter consisting of a surface float that is tethered to a base suspended in the water. This project aims to optimize the device’s storm-survival configurations, which will decrease the loads the device experiences during extreme conditions.

DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories will also provide numerical modeling resources and expertise to the teams as they develop these next-generation ideas.

The design improvements will help these devices last longer, cost less to maintain and capture even more sustainable energy from the enormous potential of the nation’s oceans and rivers. Extending the lifespans of wave energy converters will ultimately lead to a reduction in the cost of MHK-derived energy. As part of its MHK technology research and development efforts, DOE is working to harness the largely untapped renewable energy in waves, tidal, ocean and river currents that could provide clean, affordable energy to homes and businesses across the country’s coastal regions.

From Qualified Teams to Finalists: The Assessment at Technology Gate 2

Wave Energy Prize

The purpose of the Wave Energy Prize’s Technology Gate 2 (TG2) is to evaluate the likelihood of each Qualified Team’s success in achieving the ACE threshold (the doubling of the state-of-the-art ACE from 1.5 m/$M to 3 m/$M) if they were to test a larger, 1/20th scale model of their device in the MASK Basin. Those that present a high likelihood of achieving the ACE threshold will, through a rigorous judging process during TG2, be deemed Finalists.

As specified in the Wave Energy Prize Rules, TG2 will evaluate Qualified Teams using several metrics, as detailed below:

  1. As a first step in the evaluation process, judges will consider each Qualified Team’s Model Design and Construction Plan to determine if the team exhibits a reasonable understanding of the effort, tasks, timeline and materials that will be needed to design and build a 1/20th scale model. The assessment criteria for the Model Design and Construction Plans can be found in the table below:
    Criterion Narrative Document Timing Plan Bill of Materials
    To score a “Pass” Assessment The document illustrates a concise and thought out plan describing how the Team will successfully design and construct a 1/20th scale model in the allotted timeframe A detailed Gantt chart or similar timeline graphic shows the tasks that the Team plans to complete in the allotted timeframe The provided BoM template document is filled out with a logical breakdown of systems, subsystems, assemblies, and components along with actual or predicated quantity, mass, cost, supplier data for each item
    To score a “Fail” Assessment No document provided or a document that shows a significant lack of understanding of the phases, tasks, and/or steps needed to design and build a scale model No document provided or the provided document shows a significant lack of understanding the tasks and timeline needed to complete the build of a scale model. No document provided, document provided is not in the approved template form or the provided document shows a significant lack of understanding the materials to build and test a scale model

    Only teams that provide credible plans will be eligible to continue in the Prize.

  2. If the judging panel determines that a Qualified Team’s Model Design and Construction Plan is credible, i.e. if it is given a “pass,” it will then use the following information to evaluate the likelihood of the proposed wave energy converter (WEC) concept in satisfying the required threshold value for ACE during the 1/20th scale testing:
    • The capture width of the physical 1/50th scale model from the 1/50th scale testing, scaled up to full scale.
    • Assessment by the judges of the correlations between numerical model predictions and measurements for capture widths and device motions.  Predictions are at full scale for 1/50 wave conditions; experimental measurements from 1/50 test campaign are scaled up to full scale.
    • Revised Technical Submission and its re-evaluation using the Technology Performance Level rubric used in TG1.
    • Predictions of ACE (in m/$M) that can be expected in the MASK Basin testing.
    Criterion Capture Width of the Physical 1/50th Scale Model from 1/50th Scale Testing, Scaled up to Full Scale Correlation of Numerical Modeling Results to 1/50th Scale Waves Re-Evaluation of Technical Submission using TPL Predictions of ACE Expected in MASK Basin
    Value range 1 to 9 grouped in low, medium, high 1 to 9 grouped in low, medium, high 1 to 9 grouped in low, medium, high 1 to 9 grouped in low, medium, high
    Weighting for combined score 15% 25% 30% 30%

    The judges will score each of the above four criteria on a scale of 1 to 9. Then, they will calculate an overall combined score by computing a weighted average of the four individual scores.

    Qualified Teams will then be ranked from the highest overall combined score down to the lowest; up to 10 will be named Finalist Teams and up to two Alternate Teams will be identified.

    If the judges and/or Small-Scale Test Facilities are unable to test, measure and analyze the 1/50th scale WEC device in order to adequately determine absorbed power, the device will be eliminated from the Wave Energy Prize.

For more information on the assessment of the construction plan, evaluation of the four criteria, and the weighting of each as part of the overall combined score, please see the Wave Energy Prize Rules.

Year in Review and 2016 Preview: Wave Energy Prize Program Update

Wave Energy Prize - Official Logo

It has been a busy year at the Wave Energy Prize! On April 27, DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Assistant Secretary Dr. Dave Danielson announced the opening of the prize, and an impressive 92 teams registered. Sixty-six of these teams submitted technical submissions for Technology Gate 1, which were reviewed by our judges over the summer. On August 14, we announced the 20 official Qualified Teams.

As 2015 draws to a close, the Wave Energy Prize is approaching Technology Gate 2, a key milestone for the program and for the Qualified Teams. Seven qualified teams have now completed small-scale testing, including Atlas Ocean Systems, Super Watt Wave Catcher Barge Team, Sea Potential, SEWEC, Team FLAPPER, IOwec and RTI Wave Power. Ten teams are scheduled to complete small-scale testing January 4 through 29, 2016: M3 Wave, Mocean Energy, Oscilla Power, Principle Power, AquaHarmonics, WECCA, CalWave, Float Inc. – BergerABAM, Advanced Ocean Energy @ VA Tech and WaveSwing America. The remaining three Qualified Teams, Atlantic Wave Power Partnership, Enorasy Labs and OceanEnergy USA, announced their withdrawal from the competition in November.

Additionally, Qualified Teams will submit the Model Design and Construction Plans for their 1/20th scale models by January 29. This plan, along with the results of small-scale testing, numerical modeling and revisions to their technical submissions, will be evaluated by the Wave Energy Prize judges at Technology Gate 2 to determine which teams will advance as official Finalist Teams. The Wave Energy Prize anticipates announcing the Finalist Teams and alternates at the beginning of March!

We have a lot to look forward to in 2016, including 1/20th scale model testing for our finalists at the Naval Surface Warfare Center’s Maneuvering and Seakeeping Basin at Carderock, Md., beginning this summer, and ultimately the announcement of winner(s) who have successfully demonstrated achievement of the Wave Energy Prize’s goal in November!

We wish the wave energy community a happy holiday season, and we’re looking forward to keeping you updated throughout 2016!

Wave Energy Prize, team featured on ‘Weather Channel’ morning show

HAPPY FRIDAY! The ‪‎Wave Energy Prize‬ was featured earlier today on The Weather Channel’s “AMHQ” program. The segment featured M3 Wave, one of our Qualified Teams, and highlighted the potential of clean, renewable wave energy for the United States.

There’s even a shot of the U.S. Navy’s Maneuvering And Sea Keeping (MASK) basin, the world’s largest wave test facility at Carderock Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center, where our top Teams will test their Wave Energy Converter (WEC) designs.

SEE THE VIDEO: http://www.weather.com/tv/shows/amhq/video/harnessing-wave-energy-for-power

* The Wave Energy Prize is a public prize challenge sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy. LEARN MORE: http://waveenergyprize.org/

Technology Gate 2 Requirements

wep-tg2

The purpose of Technology Gate 2 is to evaluate the likelihood of each team’s success in achieving the ACE threshold if they were to test a 1/20th scale model of their device in the MASK Basin. As a first step in this evaluation process, judges will consider each Qualified Team’s Model Design and Construction Plan to determine if the team exhibits a reasonable understanding of the effort, tasks, timeline and materials that will be needed to design and build a 1/20th scale model. The team will not proceed and will be eliminated from the Wave Energy Prize if the plan is deemed not credible.

If the judging panel determines that a team’s plan is credible, it will then use the following information to evaluate the likelihood of the proposed WEC technology concept in satisfying the required threshold value for ACE during the 1/20th scale testing:

  • The capture width of the physical 1/50th scale model from the 1/50th testing, scaled up to full scale.
  • Numerical modeling results of the 1/50th scale wave environment (at full scale) and the determination by the judging panel of how well the numerical model predictions correlate with scaled-up experimental measurements. This includes absorbed power, motions, and forces.
  • Revised Technical Submission and its re-evaluation using the TPL.
  • Predictions of ACE (in m/$M) that can be expected in the MASK Basin testing, as determined by the judges, with support from the National Laboratories.

The judges will score each of the above four criteria on a scale of 1 to 9. Then, they will calculate an overall combined score by computing a weighted average of the four individual scores. Qualified Teams will then be ranked from the highest overall combined score down to the lowest; up to 10 will be named Finalist Teams and up to two Alternate Teams will be identified. If the judges and/or Small-Scale Test Facilities are unable to test, measure and analyze the 1/50th scale WEC device in order to adequately determine absorbed power, the device will be eliminated from the Wave Energy Prize.

For more information on the assessment of the construction plans, evaluation of the four criteria, and the weighting of each as part of the overall combined score, please see the Wave Energy Prize Rules.

Team Technical Summaries

It has been more than two months since the 20 Qualified Teams in the Wave Energy Prize were announced, and you are probably wondering what they have been working on. Well, they have been developing their 1/50th scale wave energy converter (WEC) models; preparing for testing these scale models; and starting to numerically model their innovative WEC designs. Below, in their own words, the Qualified Teams provide a glimpse into the breakthrough technologies they are developing (we present them alphabetically based on team name, and will do so for all Qualified Teams).

Advanced Ocean Energy @ Virginia Tech
Hampton Roads, Va.

AOE@VT WEC Technology Image for Publication FINAL 20150921

Virginia Tech’s MULti-body LinEar Terminator (MULLET) is a self-contained array of Bundled pIpe Terminator Wave Energy Converters (BITWECs). Each BITWEC is a floating bundle of large-diameter high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipes. The basic MULLET building block is a “tandem BITWEC” whereby two pipe bundles are arrayed one behind the other in the down-wave direction.

Each bundle is tethered by a pair of flexible fiber matrix composite tube pumps to the deeply submerged deck of a pontoon barge, which also is fabricated from large-diameter HDPE pipe sections, as shown in the conceptual diagram above, seawater output from the tube pumps is piped to an underwater habitat housing an accumulator and Pelton turbine-generator.

The MULLET barge is assembled while floating in calm water at dockside and then towed to its offshore installation site. Once on site, the barge is connected to a pre-set catenary anchor-leg mooring (CALM) buoy. The barge pontoons and CALM buoy are then flooded with seawater, submerging the barge to its mid-water operating position, where the barge deck acts as an inertial reaction plate for the floating bundles to work against, stretching the tube pumps. For inspection and maintenance, the barge and CALM buoy are re-floated to the surface by reversing the installation procedure.

AquaHarmonics
Portland, Ore.

aquah

AquaHarmonics’ Wave Energy Device is a point absorber device consisting of a simple Power Take Off (PTO) system mounted in a cone/cylinder shaped hull with a single mooring line that has a power cable at its core.

The PTO System consists of a sheave fixed to a shaft mounted in bearings within a sealed compartment and directly coupled to a pair of axial flux generators. The device only generates power on the rise of the wave, and during the fall of the wave the generators are operated as motors to reel in the mooring line for the next wave cycle.

During reel in, the control system of the device can provide additional energy input to achieve phase locking with any wave frequency. This control method is known as “de-clutching,” which has been shown to effectively increase the operational bandwidth of a wave energy device.

The generated power is far greater than that consumed during the wave cycle with some energy stored on board for periods of low wave activity. The power is conditioned on board and sent to shore via a slipring on the shaft connected to the power cable located at the core of the mooring line.

AquaHarmonics. Clean.Simple.Energy.

Atlantic Wavepower Partnership
Newport, R.I.

awp

The AWS-III is a large-scale surface floating multi-absorber wave energy converter. Each absorber cell comprises a partially submerged air-filled chamber, one face of which is covered with a rubber diaphragm which flexes in response to the incoming wave actions. The movement of the diaphragm pumps air to and from the cell via an air turbine-generator set where the energy is converted to electricity. The cells are inter-connected via a ring-main such that air is exchanged between cells rather than with the outside environment.

All mechanical moving parts are isolated from the sea and contained within the device, whilst the turbine technology is tried-and-tested and available on the commercial market. The device is moored using traditional systems for offshore structures, either catenary systems and drag-embedment anchors or tension tethers and suction anchors. Accordingly, the device is utility-scale and has low technical risk and is capable of on-board maintenance of all parts with the exception of the diaphragms. Initial systems are expected to be rated at 2.0MW.

Atlas Ocean Systems
Houston, Texas

atlasos

The Atlas Ocean Systems SQ5 Wave Energy Converter is a completely new device that captures energy primarily from pitch using two independent coupled oscillators. The SQ5 consists of three primary elements: 1) a float, 2) a new innovative submerged bag filled with air under pressure, and 3) a large submerged ballast.

The bag and submerged ballast are essentially in static buoyant equilibrium. The catamaran float provides roll stability and resonates in pitch with the waves and transfers vertical motion to the bag system which then excites a vertical oscillation of the submerged ballast. The oscillation of the ballast drives shape changes within the bag to pump air through a reversible flow turbine to generate useful energy. Pitch response of the float is adjustable in real-time using a ballasting system and coupling between the float and ballast is adjusted during design. Coupling between the two oscillating systems provides a wide dual-peak absorption spectrum providing good power output over a variety of sea states. There are no mechanical moving parts, seals, hinges, or pistons requiring lubrication or maintenance. The turbine system is protected within the pressurized pneumatic system and is suspended in a transverse mounting minimizing gyroscopic forces. The nominal system is designed for a 500kW-1MW rating.

Technical Summaries from more of the Wave Energy Prize Qualified Teams will be profiled in alphabetical order in the future. Visit the new Wave Energy Prize Team Updates page for more information.

Why is the development of wave energy converters so challenging? Part 2: Extracting energy from waves

Development of wave energy converters

So, how exactly can we exploit this resource?

The Wave Energy Prize received technical submissions detailing 66 unique WEC concepts.

A very small number of these couldn’t work, but the overwhelming majority were concepts that could exploit, to differing degrees, the fluid motions of water particle motions. While some of these concepts were variations on ideas seen before, that is still a very large number of different ideas. At present, the means of exploiting wave power seems only constrained by the imagination of the inventors.

And that is a challenge; one that the Wave Energy Prize is, in part, endeavoring to address.

If one thinks of the development of modern wind turbines 30 to 40 years ago, there was also a plethora of competing wind turbine designs, each hoping to become commercially competitive.

Over time, as the science, engineering and economic understanding has matured, it became possible to identify optimum approaches to the exploitation of the, essentially, linear wind flow into electricity. All turbines now are generally three-blade, horizontal-axis turbines, with a gear box and generator. More modern designs are now using permanent magnet generators, and maybe even novel hydraulic systems. Even then, the principal power absorption mechanism was essentially the same for all wind turbines – linear fluid flow into horizontal mechanical rotation (we do, however, see some small vertical axis turbines in niche applications).

At present, the means of exploiting wave power seems only constrained by the imagination of the inventors.

The same is true of tidal stream turbines, and also aircraft and car designs. Over time, the science and engineering, along with the design tools and test facilities available, lead to a science-backed consensus regarding optimum configurations. Optimum configurations might change as new materials and components become available, but changes are systematically made through an understanding of their impact on a turbine’s techno-economic performance, arising from good knowledge, understanding and information (this can also relate to cars or planes.)

The exploitation of low-speed fluid oscillations created by ocean waves, imparting very high linear or rotational forces/torques, which need to be converted to (generally) high-speed linear or rotational motion in a generator (doing so cheaply and reliably, while being survivable) is just not as well understood within the science community.

Hence the very large number of wave energy conversion concepts we see in the Wave Energy Prize, and throughout the world.

It is possible that there is no single solution that is optimal, or that there are several optimal solutions, dependent on many factors, such as site conditions, water depth, distance to shore, etc.

The exploitation of wave power faces other very significant challenges, perhaps ones that aren’t faced by wind turbines or tidal stream turbines – the most important of these is survival.

Potential wave power sites off the West Coast of the United States have annual average wave energy fluxes in the region of 20-30 kWm-1 of wave crest length. In severe winter storms, the peak power can be multiple times higher than this, perhaps as high as 1MWm-1 (an increase by a factor of 30-50 over the average wave energy flux). This provides significant challenges to the structural design and consequent capital cost, or requires survival strategies, such as diving, submersion, or perhaps even removal to shore. And these typical winter storms are not as strong as the survival conditions to be met for the “100 year wave” or rogue waves, which will be even more demanding.

Wind turbines operate in a relatively narrow range of wind speeds, and simple survival strategies are possible when winds exceed operational limits; they feather their blades to minimize the forces on the turbine. Furthermore, the forces imparted by water with a density of ~1000kgm-3 are so much larger than when the fluid is air. Tidal stream turbines are also frequently not exposed to the severe storm conditions or wave energy potentially encountered by WECs. Besides, the environmental conditions seen are far more predictable and the ranges are not so extreme.

Interestingly, deep-water waves are also intrinsically more survivable than near-shore ones, as near-shore devices could well be exposed to severe breaking waves in harsh storm conditions, which would likely lead to catastrophic failure. In severe storms, big ships head away from the shore and out to deep water for the same reason.

The exploitation of wave power also creates other challenges that are not normally as onerous for wind turbines and tidal stream turbines. These include:

  • This is straightforward for onshore and relatively straightforward for shallow-water offshore wind turbines. Tidal stream is more challenging, due to the high-speed water currents in commercial sites, but still relatively close to shore, and not at very significant water depths. For WECs in deep water, this requires multiple mooring systems, potentially remotely operated vehicles and divers, possibly operating many miles from the shore base for marine operations.
  • This requires access in potentially hostile and dangerous environments, with weather window constraints.
  • Some WEC concepts are intrinsically directional in their approach to exploiting wave power, whereas wind turbines and potentially tidal stream turbines have easy strategies for orienting the system towards optimum flow conditions for energy extraction.
  • Marine debris and biofouling. With many wave energy concepts located at the surface of the sea where the wave energy is greatest, they are potentially more vulnerable to damage caused by marine debris, such as shipping containers, ropes and fishing nets. Biofouling is also far more prevalent at the surface or near the surface, as this is where the biological activity is greatest.
  • Other uses of the sea. WECs potentially have greater impacts on other users of the sea, such as those in shipping, fishing and recreation. Many wave energy concepts have some freedom to move, but tidal or wind turbines are essentially static devices that are constrained by moorings. This uses up a large surface of the sea, and increases the potential for collisions.
  • Non-linearity. Wave energy theory is linear, which is an approximation that holds only for small waves. In practice, the waves themselves and the interaction of the device with them is likely to be non-linear, potentially requiring very significant computer power to even understand how the device might react to the waves, or accepting uncertainty in performance and maybe life-time of the device.
  • Breaking waves. This is not really a great concern for deep-water WECs, with the possible exception of rogue waves or in survival conditions. However, breaking waves impart huge slamming forces on structures and their moorings, leading to potentially catastrophic failure.

All in all, a very difficult environment to design for and survive in.

Whatever the solution is that emerges from the Wave Energy Prize and other U.S.-based and global development activities, to be successful we need to see large increases in the absorbed power, with high bandwidth and adaptability to different sea states, and maybe even wave-to-wave control, with greatly reduced capital expenditure, reliability, survivability, and maintainability.

Why is the development of wave energy converters so challenging? Part 1: The nature of waves

The Wave Energy Prize is not concerned about just developing a wave energy converter (WEC) that can generate power; that’s the easy part (as outlandish as that may seem). Rather, the goal of the Prize is to identify WEC concepts that have the prospect for becoming commercially competitive with existing means of power generation, without unsustainable public subsidies, in the next fifteen or twenty years. While that is an aggressive goal, the Wave Energy Prize is designed to make it achievable. This blog post and the next will describe why developing WECs is so challenging. First, a primer on the nature of waves themselves.

"Deep water wave" by Kraaiennest - Own work. Licensed under GFDL via Commons
“Deep water wave” by Kraaiennest – Own work. Licensed under GFDL via Commons

Real ocean waves are complex, dynamic, and cannot be precisely predicted. They are not neat and well-organized sinusoidal waves with well characterized amplitudes, frequencies, wave lengths and phases that create predictable patterns on the surface of the water through interference, diffraction, and refraction.

Over the deep ocean, winds blowing over many hundreds of kilometers lead to the creation of sea states, which when analyzed spectrally (or, broken down by defining characteristics like frequency, amplitude, and phase), show the superposition of waves of varying frequency, amplitude, and phase. In fact, the spectral distribution almost shows the history of the winds experienced by the sea over the entire journey of the wave.

At a given site in the ocean, the sea state changes over a time span of thirty minutes to one hour. Over the course of a year, a site’s wave energy resource is typically with about 1,000 sea states. Each sea state has different spectral distributions with unique probabilities of occurring – this is the so-called wave scatter diagram.

But the complexity does not end there. Local wind-driven waves can add another “peak” (or high probability of waves of certain characteristics) to the wave spectrum, and the spectral characteristics of the waves change as they move from the deep ocean to shallower depths due to shoaling and focusing effects. Ultimately the waves crest and break as they approach the shoreline.

The Wave Energy Prize is deliberately focusing on deep water applications. This isn’t to avoid the added complexity of shoaling and breaking waves. Rather, it is because it is in the deep water where the wave energy resource is strongest. By the time the waves reach the shore, all the wave energy has dissipated due to friction with the sea bed, resulting in the waves’ energy equaling zero at the shoreline.

It is important to understand how water moves in wave motions to understand how to extract energy from waves (more on this in the next blog). Deep ocean waves are a combination of sinusoidal and longitudinal waves. With wave energy being zero at the sea bed in the deep ocean due to friction, the actual water particle motion varies as a function of water depth, with the water tracing approximately circular paths near the surface, as can be seen in the video below. These paths become more elliptical and eventually linear oscillations as depth increases. The oscillations have smaller and smaller amplitudes as depth increases, as well. The next time you go to the beach, stand in the ocean near the coastline, beyond the breaking waves. You’ll experience your upper body bring pushed to move in circular paths, while your feet don’t really move that much at all.

Thus WECs need to extract the energy from circular, elliptical, or linear fluid oscillations created by waves passing through water, waves that have a large number of spectral distributions as described above, and convert this energy into other usable forms of energy. This is no mean feat, one that the Qualified Teams of the Wave Energy Prize are hoping to achieve; more on this in the next blog post. Stay tuned!