Proceedings of the ASME 28th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2009
May 31 - June 5, 2009, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

OMAE2009-80013

MEASUREMENTS IN CIRCULAR WAVE TANK WITH ACTIVE GENERATORS

Joao Alcino de Andrade Martins

Department of Naval and Ocean Engineering
Polytechnic School, University of São Paulo
Sao Paulo, SP, Brasil

ABSTRACT
This paper discusses some aspects of the new technology in
testing tank for Naval and Ocean Engineering developed at
NAOE-Osaka University, Japan, based on the concept of active
wavemakers all around the tank perimeter [1]. Past and present
measurements shown that the wave field is homogeneous with
some restrictions and can keep irregular wave more than 50
wave periods. The experimental results for platform model
diffraction force are good and agree with theory and also with
early tests [7]. The analyses of wave and platform model force
measurements prove the new wave tank concept precision,
usefulness and reliability.
1. INTRODUCTION
Since early ages of Naval and Ocean Engineering, one of the
most important facilities used in experimental works has been
the tank concept used by William Froude back in the middle of
XIX century. The test tank main purpose is to generate a
specified wave field at a desired location. To do so, within a
certain degree of quality, is difficult due to wave reflections and
re-reflections, coming from wave generator board, tank walls,
model and devices into the water.
The wave reflections must be avoided, backward and forward,
down to a required level, to maintain a required spectrum and,
to make possible to generate waves during long periods of time.
In general, this is very important, if not feasibility determinant,
in non linear and second order phenomena investigations.
These facilities are commonly very long, hundreds of meters,
wide tenths of meters and some meters deep. New Ocean
Engineering facilities have been built but they are still similar to
the old ones, except to much less long and more wide and deep,
approaching a short rectangle or square geometry. Rectangular
layouts also have been the same, providing a free and still water
surface with a wave generator at one end and a wave energy
absorber at the other end with two plane and fixed sidewalls.
One improvement in Ocean Engineering tanks is to install
another wave generator at one sidewall and another wave
energy absorber at the other sidewall.
The wave generator, or wavemaker, has evolved from a single
piece to a many segments one, making possible to generate
waves in variable heading angles into the tank. This kind of
wavemaker is known as multi directional and can simulated
short crested sea at almost any location into the tank, using also
wave reflections from the sidewall.
The wave energy absorber is often made of wood, concrete or
steel mesh, like a flat, sloping surface similar to the real natural
wave energy absorber, or the so called beach. Some other
improvements simulate roughness using in the absorber surface
coarse sand, pebbles, thin wood plank steps, metal shavings,
steel wire and some sort of other unusual materials. The sloping
surface has been determined around 1:10 inclination, as the
most often used, and the best compromise between space into
the tank and performancein absorption. Later, a different
concept was introduced using several layers of fixed upright
perforated stainless steel sheets or metal wire frame with
variable porosity to absorb wave energy and save expensive and
precious space into the tank.
New developments in Control and Electronics area brought the
active wavemaker which can generate and absorb waves
simultaneously, and can eliminate re-reflections that causes
interferences in the specified wave field.
Nowadays, considering the high costs of long and big tank, and
the development of controlled active wavemaker, the proposal
of smaller tank came into discussion.
This paper presents some results of wave and force
measurements in small circular tank with the purpose to assess
the reliability and precision of this new Ocean Engineering
facility, to prove the validity of the circular test tank
technology.

1 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

2. ELEMENTS FROM THEORY
A floating body can be designed to produce an outgoing wave ∂η  ∂ φ  (2b)
when oscillating on a still water surface and generate controlled +  =0
∂t  ∂z  z = 0
wave as required. Also, a floating body can be designed to
oscillate as required when subjected to an incoming wave.
Using the well known Ordinary Strip Method it is possible to  ∂φ  (2c)
  + gη = 0
relate floating body geometry and single degree of freedom  ∂t  z = 0
lumped parameters model to body movement and incoming
wave. These two distinct situations can be superposed and they knowing that z is the vertical axis pointing upward, referred at
will be detailed ahead. The formulation ahead is due to the still free surface, n is the normal unit vector, d is the water
Professor Naito and co-workers [1, 5, 6] already published and
depth, η is the wave elevation, g is the gravity vector and t is
condensed here.
time.
2.1. Wave Generation by a Floating Body Taking the slow motion and small amplitude case, eliminating η
A floating body forced to oscillate in a still water surface by an it comes:
external dynamic system represented by spring and dashpot in
Figure 1, generates outgoing waves. Generically, this is called  ∂φ 1 ∂ 2φ  (3)
 ∂z + = 0
plunger wavemaker and one special kind of oscillating floating  g ∂ t 2  z = 0
body has the cross sectional shape according to curves proposed
by Lewis [2]. Supposing vertical symmetrical oscillation undergoing small
displacement expressed by z=z0cos(ωt+ε) , with ω the
frequency and ε the phase, and also the wave profile being
Ne(ω) Ce(ω) External dynamic system η=ηacos(kx-ωt) , with k the wave number, then:

∂z (4a)
z (t) = − z 0 ω sin( ω t + ε )
∂t
ηa
 ∂φ ω2  (4b)
 ∂z + φ = 0
 g  z=0
Floating body Outgoing
M wave 2
where ω =g.k tan(kd) is the dispersion relationship.

Considering now the plunger wavemaker interface to the water,

Figure 1 – Illustration of floating body driven by external this floating body surface boundary condition can be
system moving vertically and producing an outgoing wave. approximate to first order and then it follows that:
The full theory to express the plunger wavemaker performance, ∂φ ∂φ ∂z  ∂z  (5)
due to Wang [3], can be found elsewhere, and in short it can be = =U 
derived, for an ideal fluid, from:
∂n ∂z ∂n  ∂n 

This equation means that the plunger surface fluid velocity, U,

∇ 2φ = 0 and ∇ 2ϕ = 0 (1)
must be equal to the plunger forced oscillation velocity along
normal direction from the body surface.
being φ the velocity potential and φ the associated stream
function. In a tank there are lateral walls and bottom where the According to Chakrabarti [4], to work out the solution it is
boundaries are fixed and impermeable. needed to consider the radiation condition, meaning the
The linearized mathematical expression for these conditions, as outgoing wave far field is progressive wave; to make a
well as the kinematic and dynamic free surface conditions are, conformal transformation, from the plunger plane to the unit
respectively, given by: circle reference plane; to solve the normal velocity boundary
conditions at the floating body surface and finally linearizing
∂φ ∂φ this condition, to get:
= =0 (2a)
∂n ∂ z B
z=−d η( x, t ) = Ah z0 sin(ωt − kx + ε ) with ε = arctan (6)
A

2 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

where Substituting equations 9, 10 and 11 into equation 8 led to:

ηa (M+m(ω))z’’(t)+(Ne(ω)+n(ω))z’(t)+(c+Ce(ω))z(t)=
Ah =
z0
= ka 0 π ( A2 + B 2 )
−1
(7)
(12)
= (ηaρg |Ah(ω)|/k)exp{ iωt + εh(ω)]}
being Ah the non dimensional response of the Lewis floating
Equation 12 is the equation 8 rewritten in terms of system
body and a0, A and B depend on surface curve and geometry, as parameters and its solution describes the motion of floating
defined by Lewis.
body among the wave. This is done by taking z(t)=z0.exp(iωt),
substituting in 12, solving and after some manipulations it leads
2.2. Wave Absorption by Floating Body
to the following expression:
Considering the real case that the floating body is attached to an
external dynamic system, represented by the parameters Ce for
ρ 2 g 2 Ah (ω)
2
the spring and Ne for the damper, subjected to an incoming 2
wave that causes a vertical movement, presented in Figure 2. zo k2
=
ηa {−[M + m(ω)]ω + [Ce (ω) + c]}2 + ω2 [N e (ω) + n(ω)]2
2

(13)
Ne(ω) Ce(ω) External dynamic system
This is the dimensionless vertical displacement response of the
floating body.
z0 To evaluate the power balance in the system, let first separate
the force done by the fluid in the floating body, [fh(t)+fw(t)].
The power will be the unit time force developed in the external
system times the velocity, meaning this product must be
Floating body Incoming wave integrated over one period. Knowing that the force a floating
M body receives from the fluid, due to an incoming wave, is
represented by equations 9 and 11, then:

1 T
Figure 2 – Illustration of floating body coupled to an external Wf = ∫ [ f h ( t ) + f w ( t )] z ' (t )dt (14)
system moving vertically when subjected to an incoming wave. T 0

Then the equation of force balance for the heave motion of As the values of cross terms are 0, and using z(t)=z0cos(ωt),
floating body under regular wave is as follows: equation 14 results in:

Mz’’(t) = fh(t) + fw(t) + fc(t) (8) 1 T N e (ω )ω 2 z 02

Wf =
T
∫
0
N e (ω )ω 2 z 02 sin 2 (ωt ) dt =
2
(15)
taking M as the mass and z’’(t) the vertical acceleration of the
floating body; fh(t) hydrodynamic force, meaning the fluid This is the power in the system induced by the wave but it is
reaction to body motion, fw(t) wave exciting force, fc(t) external known that the energy in the wave can be expressed by:
system force and t is time.
The forces fh(t), fc(t), fw(t) are known to be as follows:
ρ g η a2 C p
Ww = (16)
fh(t) =-m(ω)z’’(t) - n(ω)z’(t) - cz(t) (9) 2
fc(t) = -Ne(ω)z’(t) -Ce(ω)z(t) (10) being Cp = dω/dk the wave phase velocity.

fw(t) = (ηaρg |Ah(ω)|/k)exp{ i [ωt + εh(ω)]} (11) The case of perfect energy transfer from wave to floating body,
by the energy conservation principle, implies equation 15 must
where m(ω) added mass, n(ω) damping coefficient and c be equal to equation 16:
restoration coefficient of the floating body; Ce(ω) spring
coefficient and Ne(ω) damping coefficient of the external 2
Ne (ω)ω 2 z02 ρgηa C p
dynamic system; ηa amplitude of incident waves; εh(ω) phase = (17)
difference between wave and floating body vertical motion. 2 2

3 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

By analogy of equation 15, and considering that the energy 2.3. Directional Wave Generation
developed by heaving floating body, Wh, produces outgoing Considering the Ocean Engineering tank layout and its purpose
wave both sides, say left and right, being the energy of these one can conclude that the most desirable configuration is the
waves WL and WR , it can be written: multi element wavemaker to satisfy the requirement to generate
directional short crested waves. This set up is based in many
n(ω)ω 2 z02 wavemaker elements side by side, individually controlled,
Wh = (18) executing a coordinated movement, to produce the desired wave
2 field at a given location in the test tank.
The technological breakthrough was reached by joining the
ρ g η L2 C p ρ g η R2 C p (19) active wavemaker elements as the walls around a circular basin
WL = and WR =
2 2 creating a tank with virtually no walls. From the wave point of
view the tank has no walls at all, regarding the active
and then analogue to equation 17: wavemaker high degree of energy absorption positioned all
around the tank perimeter.
n (ω )ω 2 z 02 ρ g η L C p ρ g η R C p
2 2
If all wave energy input can be absorbed at the walls then there
Wh = = + (20) is no reflection from any walls. This led to the free field
2 2 2 condition test, resulting in a perfect testing tank, within the
reflection level accepted.
Considering the absorption coefficient as the ratio of energy
The wave generated by only one wavemaker element, much
E=Wf/Ww and applying equations 15 and 16, the absorption in
smaller than tank width, can be approximated to circular waves
the deep water case will be:
centered at the element. The directional regular waves having
long crests are constructed by superposing many circular waves
N e (ω )ω 2 z 02 2 accordingly to Huygens’ Principle. When waves are generated
2 2 N e (ω )ω 3 z 0 (21)
by using this hypothesis the control of amplitude and phase
E= =
ρgη a2 C p ρg 2 ηa angle of the relative motion among wavemaker elements
2 becomes fundamental.
To make directional waves, having wave number k, propagating
Substituting equation 13 into equation 21: to θ direction, referred to the element wavemaker normal, as
shown in Figure 3, it is needed to control the phase angle
ρ 2 g 2 Ah (ω)
2
2Ne (ω)ω3 among generators. The jth element wavemaker located at
E= distance ℓij from the ith one can be controlled by the following
ρg 2k 2 {−[M + m(ω)]ω2 +[Ce (ω) + c]}2 +ω2 [Ne (ω) + n(ω)]2
velocity Uij:
(22)

It is defined that for maximum absorption E must be unit.
Considering the case of unsymmetrical floating body wedge
like, producing waves only to one side as shown in Figures 1
and 2, it can be demonstrated that:
C e (ω ) = [ M + m (ω )]ω 2 − c (23)
N e (ω ) = n(ω ) (24)
Knowing that M, m(ω), n(ω) and c are plunger type wavemaker
parameters depending on chosen geometry, equations 23 and 24
can be used to design the external system to meet maximum
absorption of regular waves as required.
Unfortunately there are some frequency dependent terms
causing the more general theory to irregular wave absorption
very difficult to obtain. Despite these difficulties, Naito [5]
shown that it is effectively possible to absorb not only regular
waves but also narrow band or long crested irregular waves.
Using the concepts and theory explained it is possible to tune
the system parameters to a central spectrum frequency resulting
in more than 90% absorption for irregular waves.
Uij = u0 exp(iεij) (25)
where u0 is velocity amplitude and εij is the phase difference
between ith and jth wavemaker elements.
In order to generate regular waves in θ direction, the following
relation must be satisfied:
k0 = k sin θ (26)
naming k0 as the wave number of wavemakers.
Therefore, the phase difference εij can be described as:
εij = k0 ℓij = k ℓij sin θ (27)
Setting up wavemaker elements in a circular tank, by analogy to
the above explanation, the phase difference between
wavemakers will depend on only three parameters, the distance
ℓij , the wave number k and the wave direction θ as defined in
Figure 3.

4 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 3. EXPERIMENTAL WORK
The theory early explained in chapter 2 has been extensively
tested in the last 10 years by Naito and co-worker and the
results were already published [1, 6, 7].
Among many developments it was chosen, and it will be only
presented in this paper the tests results in circular configuration.
AMŒBA (Advanced Multiple Organized Experimental BAsin)
is a testing tank for Naval and Ocean Engineering purposes.

3.1 The AMŒBA basin

y The circular wave basin with active wavemakers all around,
Wavemaker element
called AMŒBA – Advanced Multiple Organized Experimental
Wave direction Basin, was built measuring 1.6 m diameter and 0.30 m deep,
with 50 active wavemaker units. The active wavemakers are
computer controlled as well as the data acquisition, storage and
Wavefront processing units, presented in Figure 4.
θ Its operation is based on the concept developed by Naito and
λ0=2π/k0 i x
Minoura [6] that the theoretical plunger type active wavemaker
j l ij is a perfect boundary and so it was built to test the hypothesis.
Many wave propagation tests have been performed into
AMŒBA [5, 7, 8, 9] and compared to theoretical calculations.
λ=2π/k
These tests were after repeated by Martins [9], at Ship Model
Experimental Towing Tank and AMŒBA Laboratory, NAOE –
Figure 3 - Definitions of wave numbers and wave direction in Osaka University - Japan.
circular and rectangular basin. (adapted from [6]) Following, it is presented the main results obtained from the
experiments with active wave generation, wave field and four
However, in this case, the wave direction is relative to the columns platform small scale model diffraction forces
location of wavemaker element, causing equation 27 to be measurements.
rewritten as:

εij = k ℓij sin θij (28)

The regular wave far field generated by a wavemaker element

can be approximated using Hankel function, and then the wave
elevation η(x,y;t) will be described by the superposition of
waves generated by wavemaker elements according to the
expression:

 J Uij  Figure 4 – AMŒBA basin view ready to platform model test,

η( x, y; t) = ℜ∑ [ ]
A(ω)H0(1) k ( x − x j ) 2 + ( y − y j ) 2 exp(iωt) and electronic active control and data acquisition systems.
 j =1 iω 
(29) 3.2. Wave Elevations Measurements
First of all, wave elevation ultrasonic sensors were installed and
knowing that H0(1) is the Hankel function of first kind and zero calibrated by precision (recirculating) ball-screw device, step
order; xj, yj are wavemaker element coordinates and J the total motor driven, and controlled by computer. Also a computer
number of elements. based data acquisition system was wired to acquire and record
Following the same procedure, it can be shown to irregular wave elevation data. After, the wave probes were installed
wave generation, when the wave amplitude is given by discrete according to the sketch presented in Figure 5 and waves were
wave spectrum form [S(ωn);φ(ωn)], the relation: generated, measured and recorded.
The initial experiment was using regular wave with no active
J 2S(ωn )∆ωn  control and then with active control on. The wave elevation
N
η(x, y; t) = ℜ∑∑
iωn
[ ]
A(ω)H0(1) kn (x − xj )2 +(y − yj )2 exp(iωnt) time histories for 2.0 Hz at 3,9 mm height wave are depicted in
j=1 n=1  Figure 6, showing at left the wave reflections interferences in
(30) both wave1 and wave2, and constant wave height when in
controlled condition.

5 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 1000
0.22 m
n Wave Probe

0.15 m
y
“n” location
0

Wave
-1000
4 3 2 1 Propagation -1000 0 x 1000
Measuring points
Direction
0.15 m

0.28 m

6 6

W av e Am plitu d e [m m ]

W av e Am plitu d e [m m ]
5 5

4 4
Figure 5 – Test tank layout and wave probes locations sketch.
3 3
-600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 0 100 200 300 400 500
8 8

Ph ase d ifferen ce [d eg ]
90 90

Ph ase d ifferen ce [deg ]

6 6
Meas Meas
45 45
W a v e E le v a tio n (m m )

4 4
W a v e E le v a tio n (m m )

Calc. Calc.
2 2
0 0
0 0
-2 -2
-45 -45
-4
-4 -90 -90
-6
-6
-600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 0 100 200 300 400 500
-8 Basin X Axis [mm] Basin Y Axis [mm]
-8
3 5 7 9 11 13
0 2 4 6 8 10
Time (s)
Wv1 Wv4
Regular 2.0 Hz No Control Wv1 Wv4 Regular 2.0 Hz Controlled
Time (s)
Figure 7 – Experimental and theoretical results comparisons,
together wave probes location and wave field simulation
Figure 6 – Time histories of 2.0 Hz at 3.9 mm height regular (adapted from [7]).
wave for “no control” and “controlled” condition, measured by
wave probes 1, at center, and 4, close to the rim. 2

Ahead is presented a summary of main tests results, in circular 1,5

Wave R.A.O.

basin configuration from early tests by Naito et al. [1,7]. Figure

7 shows regular wave test measurement results from wave 1
probes along wave propagation direction and also along
transverse direction, at the basin geometric center. 0,5

Later, Martins [9] performed the same regular wave tests to 0

quantify wave elevation measurement accuracy and -0,4 0 0,4 0,8
repeatability in the small circular tank. The results synthesis is 1.6 Hz 1.8 Hz 2.0 Hz Position (m)
presented in Figure 8 as the Response Amplitude Operator 2.4 Hz 2.8 Hz 3.0 Hz
between wave height and maximum displacement of wave
generator plunger, transformed in generated wave height. Figure 8 – Regular wave propagation measurement test results
As it can be seen, around the radius 0.4 m there is a singularity for basin entire frequency range (Martins et al. [8]).
also noticeable in the early test set by Naito. This is caused by
some wave reflection, according to cylindrical mirror theory, Following, Figure 9 shows an example of irregular wave time
concentrating wave reflections at the half diameter point. histories in both tests conditions of “no control”, noticing the
After regular wave experiments, it was performed directional strong wave reflection in both wave probes, and “controlled”
irregular wave tests. The long crested irregular waves were active wave generation. The target spectrum was defined above
generated and the wavemaker system had its parameters fixed at and the generated waves were recorded at two points.
the proposed bandwidth center frequency of 2.2 Hz (T=0.454 s) Early irregular wave tests performed by Naito et al. [1,7]
before testing. resulted in the graphics in Figure 10, showing wave probes
The angular frequency range of the target spectrum was defined locations together the results for required and measured spectra
as follows: at the point #1.
Again, these irregular wave tests were reproduced using the
(ω – 8.80)2 (ω – 18.85)2 ; for 8.80 ≤ ω ≤ 18.85 same system, the same frequency range and gaussian curve. The
S(ωn) = measuring points were the same as for the regular tests as
0 ; for ω < 8.80 and ω > 18.85 already presented in Figure 5.

6 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

 5,0 5,0 1

Required

W a v e E l e v a tio n ( m m ) .
a)
W a v e E le v a tio n (m m ).

2,5 2,5 Generated

Power Spectrum Density

Wave4
0,0 0,0 Wave1

(mm.mm.s)
0,5
-2,5 -2,5

-5,0 -5,0
0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30
Irregular waves "no control" Irregulares waves "controlled"
Wv1 Wv4 Time (s) Wv1 Wv4 Time (s)

0
1 2 3 4
Figure 9 – Time histories examples of irregular wave for “no
Frequency (Hz)
control” and “controlled” condition, measured by wave probes
1, at center, and 4, close to the rim. 6
b)

0.5 3

Wave Elevation (mm)

Target
Measured
PSD at Point 1 [mm2 sec.]

0.4
0

0.3

0.2 -3

0.1
-6
0 10 20 30 40
0
0 10 20 Time (s)
Wave1 Wave4 Generated
Frequency [rad./sec.]

Figure 10 – Wave probes locations and results for irregular Figure 11 – a) Irregular wave spectra from measured signals
wave propagation test (adapted from [7]). compared to required and generated ones and b) sample of
generated and propagated wave elevations time series.
It is worth to say that all the wave records were unfiltered
meaning there was no signal manipulations or smoothing. Even The range of regular waves was from 0.33 s to 0.62 s, with
considering this, the results presented here show similar constant wave amplitude. The load cell was calibrated fixing it
behavior to those reported early, as mentioned. in the bench and applying a known load in the appropriated
The envelope of generated wave, obtained from plunger vertical direction. This was done for both heave and surge directions
displacement, wave1 and wave4 measured signal spectra have correlating force applied to electrical signal output. Data
similar shape on the average, except for measured position acquisition and recording were the same as already stated in
wave1 at 2.3Hz. In Figure 11 it is shown a sample of these wave tests.
spectra and time series waves.
The results from Naito [1, 5, 7], already cited, show the good
agreement between theoretical and experimental wave
elevations. Also there is strong data consistency when
comparing experimental results themselves, the early ones and
the present ones, analyzed by Martins [9].
The fluctuations found in the wave height measurements
amongst previous tests, present tests and tests repetitions were
in the 2% deviation band. This means that the wave field into
AMŒBA is homogeneous at certain extension and precision
level, as well as reliable and reproducible. Figure 12 – Four columns platform model test set up and
instrumentation arrangement.
3.3. Platform Model Forces Measurements
The four columns platform model test setup, shown in Figure The heave and surge forces were measured by the two forces
12, highlights the model and instrumentation arrangement. The component load cell rigidly attached to the model and to the rod
bi dimensional unidirectional waves were generated from the connected to the carriage. During tests runs there were no
right side to the left side of the picture, and the wave perceptible movements in any direction, in the model or in the
propagation direction coincides with X axis in the drawings. supporting frame and structure.

7 Copyright © 2009 by ASME

The surge and heave forces collected were analyzed and
processed giving the results illustrated in Figure 13. The results
displayed are theoretical calculation, using linear wave theory
and Morrison equation, compared to present tests.
1,5
1,0
Force R.A.O.
Calculated
0,5
Measured
0,0
0,0 2,0
Fsurge Fheave Fsurge Fheave
Figure 13 – Experimental heave and surge force results
compared to calculated ones in four column platform model
tests.
It can be noticed that experimental points are within ±2 %
deviation band showing a very good match between tests and
repetitions. Taking that in dynamic testing, like these ones, the
desirable precision is +5% (< 0.5 dB) for engineering purposes,
these results comparison can be considered very good.
Also there is a good agreement when comparing theoretical
calculations and the results presented, being the maximum
deviation noticed at the frequency 1.6 Hz for surge. Additional
comments are that most of the uncertainty came from the
electrical noise in the load cell, due to very low level signal,
whose was processed unfiltered.
Once more, it was shown the good performance of the small
circular test tank with active wave generator all around the
perimeter, considering wave field and four column platform
model force test measurements.
The tests results were within acceptable engineering deviation
band when comparing early tests, theoretical calculations and
present tests, demonstrating the precision range, repeatability
and reliability of this new testing facility.
4. CONCLUSIONS
After all these past and present wave and model force tests
results analyses it is possible to affirm that the small circular
basin equipped with active generator all around the perimeter is
a very powerful tool for experimental Naval and Ocean
Engineering research and education. The experimental results
obtained agree well to calculations, theoretical and numerical,
and also matching amongst different sets of experiments, by
different authors and in different years.
It was proven the methodology correctness and the equipment
reliability and tests repeatability. The AMŒBA performance
main conclusions from the experiments and calculations can be
shortened as the following:
- it is possible to generated a stable wave field, regular and
irregular, in the range of 1.6 Hz to 3.0 Hz, with confidence level
within ±10 % deviation in wave elevation, measured along
wave propagation direction, inside at about half diameter
centered circle;
- regular waves can be generated and are reproducible within
+2% error in wave elevation in the full range tested;
- when the wavemaker external dynamic system is optimized for
the absorption of the central frequency wave of the long crested
4,0 6,0 irregular spectrum, the absorption is more than 90%, meaning
Ka the wave field can be generated for a long time;
- the experimental results for the diffraction force measured
have been found within ±2% deviation band between tests and
repetitions and within +7% among present tests results and
calculation.
However, there are experimental difficulties in the AMŒBA
because of the very small scale factor. Also it is recommended
to investigate the circular tank resonance frequencies and
oscillating modes, and how they affect the wave field, to better
choose the frequency range and the model locations into the test
tank.
These subjects indicates future field of investigations for the
multi directional wave generation in the AMŒBA, as well
complete irregular wave absorption for wide band spectrum. At
the present, a theoretical solution for wide band spectrum for
irregular waves was worked out, but not yet experimentally
implemented [5]. It will take some time and efforts to
materialize the solution, to test and develop the system to
absorb wide band spectrum for irregular waves.
The effectiveness and reliability of small tank test for Naval and
Ocean Engineering purpose has been demonstrated by
theoretical, numerical and experimental ways. The space
utilization, economic and engineering aspects are quite obvious
from construction and operation point of view, as well as
material and human resources needed to implant and to keep the
facility running.
The concepts here explained is a technological breakthrough in
Naval and Ocean Engineering Laboratory testing and should be
widely discussed and perfected to widespread this important
experimental field of scientific and technical investigations.
8 Copyright © 2009 by ASME
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author expresses his gratitude to NAOE-Osaka University
Staff for the receptiveness, especially to Professor Shigeru
Naito (now retired), for project advising, and Dr. Munehiko
Minoura, for the fellowship, also to Mr. Yasuhiro Shimizu for
equipment preparation.
To FAPESP-Fundação de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de São
Paulo for financial support to the project 05/01309-9.

8. REFERENCES
[1] Naito, S.; Minoura, M.; Sakashita, H. and Tanaka, K.,
1998, A New Concept of Wave Making Basin.
Proceedings of Intl Workshop on Modeling of Ocean
Environments in Wave and Current Basin, p. 95-112.

[2] Lewis, E. V., 1967, The Motion of Ships in Waves.

Chapter IX, in: Principles of Naval Architecture. Ed. John
Comstock, SNAME, New York.

[3] Wang, S., 1974, Plunger type wavemakers: Theory and

Experiment. J. Hydraulic Research, V. 12 (3), p. 357-388.

[4] Chakrabarti, S.K., 1994, Offshore Structure Modeling, in

Advanced Series on Ocean Engineering. v. 9, World
Scientific Publishing, New Jersey, 470 p.

[5] Naito, S., 2006, Wave Generation and Absorption Theory

and Application. Proceedings of 16th Intl Conference on
Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering.. California,
USA, v.3, p. 1-9.

[6] Naito, S. and Minoura, M., 1994, Research on Element

Wave Makers and Wave Field Generated by Their
Combination. Proceedings of 4th Intl Symposium on
Offshore and Polar Eng., v.3, p. 8-16.

[7] Naito, S. and Minoura, M., 1999, Evaluation of

Performance of New Wave Making Basin. Proceeding of
the 9th Intl Symposium on Offshore and Polar Eng., v.3, p.
396-403.

[8] Martins, J. A. de A.; Naito, S.; Minoura, M.; Shimakawa,

Y., 2007, Wave and Force Measurements in Circular
Compact Basin. Proceedings of the 20th Pan-American
Congress of Naval Engineering. São Paulo, Brasil.

[9] Martins, J.A. de A., 2006, Study on Small Wave Tank with
Active Wavemakers: The AMŒBA Basin New
Technology. Visiting doctor research report to NAOE-
Osaka University, Japan, August,. 42 p.

9 Copyright © 2009 by ASME