3 views

Uploaded by jano_rdr

- Rating of Alternator _ Electrical4u
- my biodata.doc
- REGULADOR CDVR
- Electrical
- Electric Generator
- 500 MW Generator, Salient Features
- J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 2(5)4812-4819, 2012
- P169
- 080501 Recomended Generator Protections
- BHEL_newREPORT 2
- GetTRDoc.pdf
- DC Generator Lecture
- Principle of DC Generator
- Bicycle Pedal Power Generator FAQ Frequently Asked Questions.pdf
- AvK Project guide
- c 10551757
- naval-technology-brochure-en.pdf
- Training Machine1, Homework in electrical machines
- 5-2011-b
- GE NEF 100 M

You are on page 1of 15

com/

Energy Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical

http://pia.sagepub.com/content/220/8/855

The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1243/09576509JPE284

2006 220: 855 Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy

M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen and H Polinder

Modelling and test results of the Archimedes wave swing

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

be found at:

can Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part A: Journal of Power and Energy Additional services and information for

http://pia.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:

http://pia.sagepub.com/content/220/8/855.refs.html Citations:

Modelling and test results of the Archimedes

wave swing

M G de Sousa Prado

1

, F Gardner

1

, M Damen

1,2

, and H Polinder

3

1

Teamwork Technology, Zijdewind, The Netherlands

2

Rijswijk University of Professional Technical Education, Rijswijk, The Netherlands

3

Electrical Power Processing, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

The manuscript was received on 7 February 2006 and was acepted after revision for publication on 17 August 2006.

DOI: 10.1243/09576509JPE284

Abstract: The objective of this paper is to describe the modelling and some of the offshore test

results of the full-scale model of Archimedes wave swing (AWS) at Portugal in 2004. The AWS is a

system that converts ocean wave energy into electric energy. A pilot plant of this system has

been built. The paper starts with the derivation of a model for the oater motion. Next, the

generator system is described and modelled. The generator system consists of a permanent-

magnet linear synchronous generator with a current source inverter. Subsequently, test results

are presented to validate the models for the oater motion and the generator. Finally, some

conclusions are drawn.

Keywords: ocean wave energy, modelling, permanent-magnet generator, linear generator,

Archimedes wave swing

1 INTRODUCTION

Important factors that have stimulated the use of

renewable energy are energy cost, energy indepen-

dence, and mainly environmental protection.

Therefore, great efforts are made in the elds of

wind energy, solar energy, hydro power, and so on.

Ocean wave energy is a renewable energy source

with a huge potential, but further from commercial

viability. Different wave energy conversion systems

have been proposed [113]. This paper is about a

system that converts ocean wave energy into electric

energy, namely the Archimedes wave swing (AWS).

The idea behind the system comes from Fred

Gardner and Hans van Breugel.

Figure 1 illustrates the principle of operation.

Basically, the AWS is a cylindrical air-lled chamber.

The waves move the lid of this chamber, called the

oater, in vertical direction with respect to the

bottom part, which is xed to the sea-bottom.

When a wave is above the AWS, the AWS volume is

reduced by the high water pressure. When a wave

trough is above the AWS, the volume increases

because of the air pressure inside the AWS. From

this linear motion, energy can be extracted and

converted into electrical energy. By tuning the

system frequency to the average wave frequency,

the stroke of the linear motion can be made larger

than the wave height.

The AWS is a unique wave energy conversion

system because it is completely submerged. This is

important, because this makes the system less

vulnerable in storms. Besides, it is not visible, so

that the public acceptance is not such a problem as

for, for example, wind farms.

To prove the principle of operation behind this

idea, a few small models have been developed

(scale 1:20 and 1:50 to the nal system) [14, 15].

These models showed that the system worked and

validated the models predicting the hydrodynamic

forces on and the hydrodynamic damping of the

oater.

As a next step, a pilot plant of the AWS was built at

the Portuguese coast in 2001. The main objective of

this pilot plant was to prove that the complete

and Computer Science, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg

4, Delft 2628 CD, The Netherlands. email: h.polinder@tudelft.nl

855

JPE284

#

IMechE 2006 Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

system works and can survive. Predictions of the

performance of the system, the annual energy yield,

and the design of the generator system have been

presented in references [16] to [20].

Figure 2 depicts a photograph of the pilot plant

before submersion. The centre part is the oater

with a diameter of 9.5 m. The rated stroke is 7 m and

the rated velocity is 2.2 m/s. The maximum peak

power is 2 MW. The power is delivered to the grid

through a current source inverter or dumped into a

resistor bank in case the inverter is not available. To

improve the power factor of the generator, a 1.2 mF

capacitor bank was used in parallel with the inverter

(or resistor). Although the linear generator is able to

brake with a 1 MN force, a braking system had to be

included in the device to damp the motion in case

of generators limitation for higher waves or failure.

This system consists of two cylinders sliding into

each other, forcing the water trapped inside to ow

through an orice. By changing the area of the orice,

the braking force can be adjusted to the desired level.

During the tests, the area of the orice was always

kept at the minimum (water brakes were closed)

and, therefore, the damping was quite high. The

moving part of the device has a mass of around

0.4 Mkg (fromwhich 0.04 Mkg is due to the translator

of the generator), and the total mass of the device,

including the pontoon, is 7 Mkg (from which

5 Mkg are just due tothe sandballast tanks). The over-

all dimensions of the device are 48 m 28 m 38 m

(L W H), where most of the volume is reservedfor

the ballasting tanks necessary for the submerge/

emerge operation. The air volume of the device at

midposition is 3000 m

3

and can be changed by

pumping in/out water. The total volume of water

that canbe pumpedis 1500 m

3

andpermits the con-

troller to tune the natural period of the device in the

range of 713 s.

The objective of this paper is to derive a model for

the oater motion and the generator system and to

validate this model by means of the rst offshore

test results of the full-scale pilot plant. This model

oater motion has not been published in so much

detail before. Also the model validation by mean of

offshore test results is an important contribution of

this paper. The generator was tested with the inverter

as a load and also with the resistor bank as a load. In

this paper, the test results presented are only for the

resistor load. In reference [21], test results are

presented where the inverter is the generator load.

This paper starts with the derivation of a model for

the motion for the oater of the pilot plant. Next, the

main design choices for the generator are discussed

and a model of the generator system is presented.

Subsequently, some measurement results from the

pilot plant are discussed to validate the models and

some conclusions are presented.

2 MECHANICAL MODEL OF AWS

This section starts with a rather complete equation

for the motion of the oater. Then, this equation is

simplied to an equation that is used in this paper.

2.1 Non-linear time domain model

The model of the unconstrained heave motion of the

oater can be described in time domain by the

second law of Newton

m

f

x F

RAD

.,,.

Damping and

Inertia Force

F

BEAR

F

DRAG

F

GEN

F

WB

.,,.

Damping Forces

F

AIR

F

NITRO

F

GRAV

F

HS

.,,.

Spring Forces

F

WAVE

.,,.

Exciting Force

(1)

Fig. 1 Sketch illustrating the principle of operation of

the AWS

Fig. 2 Photograph of the pilot plant before

submersion

856 M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen, and H Polinder

Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy JPE284

#

IMechE 2006

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

This equation contains the following quantities

and forces.

x is the vertical displacement of the generator and

m

f

the mass of the oater (including all moving parts

of the device).

F

RAD

is the radiation force due to the motion of the

oater inside water, responsible for generating the

radiated wave. This force includes inertia forces

responsible for the acceleration of the water and

damping forces due to the radiated energy. For

small motions, it can be approximated by

F

RAD

m

add1

x

_

t

0

R(t t) _ x(t)dt (2)

where m

add1

is the added mass at innite frequency

and R(t) the retardation function that expresses the

memory of the uid. The radiation force does not

depend only on the instantaneous acceleration and

velocity of the oater but on the history of the

motion of the oater.

The parameters m

add1

and R(t) can only be calcu-

lated analytically for very simple geometries. For a

generic body, numerical computation is required [22].

F

BEAR

is the force due to friction of the bearings.

This force can be described by

F

BEAR

m

BEAR

F

HOR

sign( _ x) (3)

where m

BEAR

is the bearing friction coefcient and

F

HOR

the horizontal force that the waves and current

apply to the oater. If the diameter of the device is

small when compared with the wavelength of the

incident waves, then the horizontal force may be cal-

culated from the Morisons equation combined with

strip theory [22].

F

DRAG

is the drag force applied by the water to the

oater and is given by

F

DRAG

1=2rS

f

_ xj _ xjC

DUP

, _ x 50

1=2rS

f

_ xj _ xjC

DDW

, _ x , 0

_

(4)

where S

F

is the surface area of the oater, and C

DUP

and C

DDW

are the drag coefcients when the oater

is moving upwards or downwards.

F

GEN

is the force applied by the generator. When

the generator is connected to the grid via a power

electronic converter (such as a voltage source inver-

ter), this converter determines the force applied by

the generator within the limitations of the generator

and the converter. Other forms of loading the genera-

tor, e.g. resistive loads, are also possible.

F

WB

is the damping force applied by the water

brakes. This force results from the pressure build

up inside the water brakes, due to the forced ow

of water through three orices (one of them

adjustable) and can be expressed by a quadratic

function of the velocity

F

WB

b

WB

_ xj _ xj; b

WB

rS

WB

S

WB

C

V

S

O

_ _

2

(5)

where b

WB

is the damping coefcient of the water

brakes that can be deduced from the hydraulic

head loss equation of the ow through an orice, r

the water mass density, S

WB

the cross area of the

water brakes at which the breaking pressure is

acting, C

V

the discharge coefcient of the orice,

and S

O

the orice area through which the water can

ow; by varying the area of the orice it is possible

to adjust the amount of damping.

F

AIR

is the force due to the air pressure inside AWS.

This force depends on the displacement of the oater

due to the compression and decompression of the air

and can be expressed by

F

AIR

(x) S

f

p

a

(x), p

a

(x) p

a

V

a

V

a

(x)

_ _g

p

a

V

a

V

a0

S

f

x V

W

_ _g

(6)

where S

f

is the oater area, p

a

the air pressure inside

AWS, g is a coefcient between 1 (isothermal beha-

viour) and 1.4 (adiabatic behaviour), V

a

(x) the air

volume inside AWS for a certain water volume, V

a0

the volume for the oater at midposition without

water inside AWS, V

W

the water volume inside the

AWS, and p

a

and

V

a

the equilibrium air pressure

and volume at the equilibrium position x.

F

NITRO

is the force due to the nitrogen cylinder.

This force depends on the displacement of the oater

due to the compression and decompression of the

nitrogen and can be expressed by

F

NITRO

(x) S

n

p

n

(x), p

n

(x) p

n

V

n

V

n

(x)

_ _g

p

n

V

n

V

n0

S

n

x

_ _g

(7)

where S

n

is the surface area of the nitrogen cylinder, p

n

the nitrogen pressure inside the nitrogen cylinder, g

coefcient between 1 (isothermal behaviour) and 1.4

(adiabatic behaviour), V

n

(x) the nitrogen volume

inside the cylinder for a certain position of the oater

x, V

n0

the nitrogen volume for the oater in the mid-

position, and p

n

and

V

n

the equilibrium nitrogen

pressure and volume at the equilibrium position x.

F

GRAV

is the gravity force applied to the oater,

given by

F

GRAV

m

f

g (8)

where g is the gravity acceleration.

Modelling and test results of the AWS 857

JPE284

#

IMechE 2006 Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

F

HS

is the force due to the hydrostatic pressure

acting outside AWS. This force depends on the dis-

placement of the oater and can be expressed by

F

HS

(x) S

f

brg(d

f

h

T

x) p

amb

c (9)

where d

f

is midposition oaters depth relative to

the Hydrographic zero, h

T

the tide level relative to

the Hydrographic zero, and p

amb

the ambient

pressure.

F

WAVE

is the force due to the total dynamic

pressure eld acting on the oater resulting from

the incoming wave and the diffracted wave from the

device. This is the force responsible for exciting the

AWS dynamics. Considering linear wave theory and

innitesimal motions of the device, the wave force

can be calculated by

F

WAVE

(v) H(v)A(v) (10)

where H(v) is the transfer function that relates the

wave force with its amplitude A. Owing to the com-

plexity of the diffraction phenomena, the transfer

function H(v) has to be generally computed numeri-

cally [22] and may be only calculated analytically for

very simple geometries. For devices much smaller

than the wavelength of the exciting wave, the dif-

fracted wave may be neglected, and the wave force

is mainly due to the pressure eld of the incident

wave, which permits us to write the wave force in

the form

F

WAVE

(v) rgS

f

K

P

(v,d

ZH

h

T

,d

f

h

T

x)

.,,.

H(v)

A(v)

(11)

where d

ZH

is the water depth with respect to the

hydrographic zero level. K

p

represents the pressure

depth factor at depth d from the surface, for a total

water depth of h and wave number k(v) [22] and is

given by

K

P

(v, h, d)

cosh[k(v)(h d)]

cosh[k(v)h]

(12)

2.2 Equilibrium condition, stability, and

resonance

In a static situation, with no wave force exciting the

device, there is one equilibrium position x where all

the spring forces cancel each other, and may be

given by the following implicit relation

p

a

( x)

m

f

g

S

f

rg(d

f

h

T

x) p

amb

S

n

S

f

p

n

( x) (13)

Depending on the parameters of equation (13) (air

pressure, nitrogen pressure, mass of the oater, tide,

etc.), the authors may have a solution for the equili-

brium position within or outside the stroke. In the

later case, the real equilibrium position will be

located at the limit of the stroke became of the end

stops.

One important issue is the stability of the

dynamics at the equilibrium point. The local stability

at the equilibrium point can be determined from the

sign of total spring coefcient k, given by

k

d(F

AIR

F

NITRO

F

GEN

F

HS

)

dx

x x

k

a

k

n

k

h

(14)

where k

a

, k

n

, and k

h

are the air, nitrogen, and hydro-

static spring coefcients in the equilibrium position

k

a

dF

AIR

dx

x x

gS

2

f

p

a

V

a

(15)

k

n

dF

NITRO

dx

x x

gS

2

n

p

n

V

n

(16)

k

h

dF

HS

dx

x x

rgS

f

(17)

If k is positive then the equilibrium point is stable

and if k is negative the equilibrium point will be

unstable. From this expression, it can be seen that

the gas spring coefcients (air and nitrogen) are

always positive and therefore contribute to stabilize

the dynamics. In contrast the hydrostatic spring is

always negative, having a destabilizing effect on the

dynamics. The stability occurs whenever the gas

springs are stiffer than the hydrostatic spring.

An important aspect of the gas springs is the

dependence of their stiffness with frequency, which

is taken into account by the factor g. For high

frequency (fast motions), g should be close to 1.4

(adiabatic behaviour) and therefore a stiffer spring

is expected. For low frequency (slow motions), g

should be close to 1 (isothermal behaviour) and

therefore a softer spring is expected. The classi-

cation of slow/fast motion depends on whether the

period of the motion is much higher/smaller than

the thermal constant of AWS, which is 0.5 h. For

the range of wave periods from 5 to 15 s, where

most of the wave energy is expected to be present,

858 M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen, and H Polinder

Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy JPE284

#

IMechE 2006

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

the air and nitrogen spring behaviour can be

considered as adiabatic (g 1:4), which means that

the motion will be fast enough to prevent heat

exchange between the gas and the exterior during

each wave cycle.

Owing to the existence of a spring, the device will

have a natural period given by

T

n

2p

m

k

_

(18)

where m represents the total inertia of the device. By

adjusting the stiffness of the spring, it is possible to

tune the natural period of the device and make it res-

onate with the incoming waves. At resonance, the

power absorbed by the device from the waves will

be maximized. This is the basic principle of AWS

and it is the same principle behind the tuning of a

receiver to a desired radio station, where a capacitor

is adjusted in order to match the natural period of the

receiver with the base frequency of the radio station.

It should be noted that the adjustment of the air

spring is a slow process since it is done by pumping

water in/out of the device. Therefore, the tuning of

the natural period by air spring adjustment cannot

be made on a wave by wave basis, but only for the

average wave period of the sea spectrum that

changes slowly with time.

For low frequency motions, the gas springs are

softer and may be not stiff enough to compensate

the destabilizing hydrostatic spring, resulting in a

negative k. Therefore, the average motion of the

device may be unstable and drift away from the

equilibrium position. To compensate this instability,

control of the position will be needed in order to keep

the average position around the desired equilibrium

position.

2.3 Simplied model for tests evaluation

To make a rst evaluation of the measured data, a

simplied model of the heave dynamics of the oater

was considered. The main simplifying assumptions

made are as follows.

1. The drag and bearing dampings are neglected

since generator and water brakes were the main

sources of damping. This is mainly because the

resistor load of the generator was quite low

during the test and the water brakes were always

on.

2. The spring forces are linearized around the equili-

brium position.

3. The radiation force is reduced only to the inertia

force due to the added mass at innity frequency

(the radiation damping and the dependence of

added mass with frequency is neglected).

The resulting simplied model can be expressed in

the form

(m

f

m

add1

) x b

GEN

_ x b

WB

_ xj _ xj kx

F

WAVE

(19)

where m

f

is 0.4 Mkg. This value resulted from

adding up all the weights of the separate parts that

make up the moving part of AWS (including the

translator of the generator). These weights were

measured separately during the construction of

AWS. m

add1

is 0.2 Mkg. This value was computed

from linear hydrodynamic software AQUADYN [14].

b

GEN

, is given by equation (35), see section 3.4 for

details. b

WB

, is calculated from equation (5), using

the geometric dimensions of the water brakes

and standard hydraulic discharge coefcient, result-

ing in 1:42 10

6

Ns

2

=m

2

. k is calculated from

equations (14), (15), (16), and (17), using the geo-

metric dimensions of the oater and the nitrogen

cylinder and the measured average gas pressures

(air and nitrogen).

Since there were no direct measurements of

the wave force or of the amplitude of the incident

waves on top of the device, the wave force had to

be estimated from a water pressure measurement

p

W

made above the outer structure of the device.

The wave force was obtained by simply scaling

the measured pressure variation taking into account

the pressure depth factor of the pressure sensor and

the equilibrium position of the device, at the

observed average wave frequency, according to

F

W

S

f

(p

W

p

W

)

K

P

(v

AV

, d

ZH

h

T

, d

f

h

T

x)

K

P

(v

AV

, d

ZH

h

T

, d

P

h

T

)

(20)

where K

p

represents the pressure depth factor

introduced in equation (12), d

p

the depth of the

pressure sensor relative to the hydrographic zero,

and v

AV

the average frequency of the incoming

waves.

3 GENERATOR SYSTEM

This section describes the generator system. It starts

with a discussion of a number of design consider-

ations. Then a generator model will be derived. Sub-

sequently, the parameters of the model are derived

from the design. The last part of this section gives a

specic model for the generator with the load used

in the experiments.

Modelling and test results of the AWS 859

JPE284

#

IMechE 2006 Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

3.1 Design considerations

The main requirements for the generator system of

the pilot plant of the AWS are the following:

(a) maximum stroke: 7 m;

(b) maximum speed: 2.2 m/s;

(c) maximum force: 1 MN;

(d) robust;

(e) maintenance as low as possible;

(f) efcient;

(g) cheap.

During the design process, the following choices

were made in order to meet the requirements as

good as possible [19].

1. Probably, a generator system consisting of a

gearbox that converts the linear oater motion

into rotating motion and a standard rotating

generator would be a cheap and rather efcient

solution. However, it appears to be extremely

difcult to build a robust, maintenance-free

gear. Therefore, a linear generator is used, as

also proposed in references [9] to [13].

2. It is nearly impossible and extremely expensive

to make the generator large enough to take all

possible forces generated by waves. Therefore,

the AWS also has water dampers that can make

very high forces. This implies that the generator

can be designed as a compromise between

energy yield and cost.

3. The linear generator that converts the mechan-

ical energy into electrical energy is a perma-

nent-magnet (PM) generator because it has a

rather high force density, and it has a relatively

high efciency at low speeds when compared

with other machine types [19]. That the ef-

ciency is relatively high appears from the fact

that the annual dissipation in the PM generator

with stator iron is the lowest from the ve

machine types compared in reference [19].

4. The magnets are on the translator that moves up

and down, so that there is no electrical contact

between the moving part (the translator) and

the stator, which is important because such an

electrical contact suffers from wear.

5. The generator is at. Maybe, round generator

constructions t better in the construction of

the AWS. However, for a single generator for a

pilot plant, it was much cheaper to remain

close to existing production technology and

build a at generator.

6. The number of slots per pole per phase is

1. Increasing this number would lead to large

pole pitches, resulting in thicker yokes and a

higher risk of demagnetization. Decreasing the

number of slots per pole per phase (using

fractional pitch windings) would lead to

additional eddy-current losses due to additional

space harmonics.

7. The magnets are skewed to reduce cogging.

8. The translator with the magnets is only a few

metres longer than the stator in order to reduce

cost. This means that in the central position,

the magnets of the translator are completely

overlapping the stator so that maximum forces

can be made, but in the extreme positions, the

magnets only partly overlap the stator.

9. To balance the attractive forces between stator

and translator, the generator is double sided, as

depicted in Fig. 3. The attractive force density is

200 kN/m

2

.

10. For cooling the stator of the generator, a water

cooling system was implemented.

11. The power electronic converter for the grid

connection is placed on shore so that possible

problems with the power electronics and the

control could easily be solved. A 6 km long

cable connects the generator terminals to the

converter on shore.

12. A current source inverter on the shore is used for

the utility grid connection. A voltage source

inverter would have advantages of better control

characteristics, better power factor, better

generator efciency, and higher forces (and

energy yield) [18]. However, it appeared to be

easier and cheaper to make a current source

inverter available.

Fig. 3 Section of the four pole pitches of the linear PM

generator. The middle part is the stator with

stator iron and coils in the stator slots in

between. The left and right parts are the

translators with the magnets with arrows

indicating the magnetization direction

860 M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen, and H Polinder

Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy JPE284

#

IMechE 2006

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

13. Coatings are used to protect the generator

against the aggressive environment.

Figure 3 depicts a cross-section of the generator.

When the translator with the magnets moves up

and down, voltages are induced in the coils in the

stator slots. In reference [20], a more detailed

description of the generator topology may be

found. Figure 4 depicts a photograph of a part of

the stator.

3.2 Generator modelling

The general form of a voltage equation of a wire is

given by Faradays law

u Ri

dl

dt

(21)

where u is the voltage between the terminals, R the

resistance of the wire, i the current through the

wire, and l is the ux linkage of the wire.

Within the generator, there are four sources that

contribute to the ux linkage, namely the PMs

and the three stator currents. If it is assumed that

(a) the system is linear (saturation is negligible);

(b) the mutual inductances between the different

phases are equal because of symmetry; (c) the sum

of the three stator currents is zero; and (d) the pos-

ition of the translator is chosen zero when the ux

linkage of phase a is zero, then the ux linkage of

stator phase a can be written as

l

a

Li

a

Mi

b

Mi

c

l

pma

L

s

i

a

l

pm

sin

p

t

p

x

_ _

(22)

where L is the self inductance of a phase, M the

mutual inductance between two stator phases, L

s

the synchronous inductance of a phase if the other

phases are also conducting (L

s

L M), l

pm

is the

ux linkage due to the PMs, and t

p

is the pole pitch.

If this is substituted in the voltage equation and the

same is done for the other phases, the result is

u

a

R

s

i

a

L

s

di

a

dt

^

l

pm

p

t

p

dx

dt

sin

p

t

p

x

_ _

R

s

i

a

L

s

di

a

dt

^ e

p

sin

p

t

p

x

_ _

u

b

R

s

i

b

L

s

di

b

dt

^

l

pm

p

t

p

dx

dt

sin

p

t

p

x

2

3

p

_ _

R

s

i

b

L

s

di

b

dt

^ e

p

sin

p

t

p

x

2

3

p

_ _

u

c

R

s

i

c

L

s

di

c

dt

^

l

pm

p

t

p

dx

dt

sin

p

t

p

x

4

3

p

_ _

R

s

i

c

L

s

di

c

dt

^ e

p

sin

p

t

p

x

4

3

p

_ _

(23)

3.3 Parameter determination from the design

The parameters used in these equations are now cal-

culated from the design of the machine, as described

more extensively in reference [20]. The following

assumptions are used in the calculations.

1. Space harmonics of the magnetic ux density

distribution in the air gap are negligible, only the

fundamental is considered.

2. The magnetic ux density crosses the air-gap

perpendicularly.

3. The magnetic permeability of iron is assumed to

be innite.

The amplitude of the no-load voltage induced by

the magnets can be calculated as [20]

^ e

p

^

l

pm

p

t

p

dx

dt

2N

s

k

w

l

s

^

B

g

dx

dt

(24)

where N

s

is the number of turns of the phase wind-

ing, k

w

the winding factor, l

s

the stack length of the

machine perpendicular to the plane of the drawing,

and

^

B

g

the amplitude of the fundamental space har-

monic of the magnetic ux density in the air gap due

to the magnets.

The amplitude of the fundamental space harmonic

of the magnetic ux density in the air gap due to the

magnets can be calculated as [20]

^

B

g

l

m

m

rm

g

eff

B

rm

4

p

sin

pb

p

2t

p

_ _

(25)

where l

m

is the magnet length in the direction of the Fig. 4 Photograph of a stator part in the AWS

Modelling and test results of the AWS 861

JPE284

#

IMechE 2006 Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

magnetization, m

rm

the relative recoil permeability of

the magnets, B

rm

the remanent ux density of the

magnets, b

p

the width of the magnet, and g

eff

the

effective air gap.

The effective air gap of the machine is calculated as

g

eff

k

C

g

1

g

1

g

l

m

m

rm

k

C

t

s

t

s

g

1

g

g

4

p

b

s

2g

1

arctan

b

s

2g

1

_ _

log

1

b

s

2g

1

_ _

2

_ _

_

_

_

(26)

where k

C

is the Carter factor [20, 23], g the mechan-

ical air gap, t

s

the slot pitch, and b

s

the slot opening

width.

The main part of the synchronous inductance can

be calculated as

L

sm

6m

0

l

s

t

p

(k

w

N

s

)

2

pg

eff

p

2

(27)

where p is the number of pole pairs.

Slot, air-gap, and end-winding leakage induc-

tances are calculated as in reference [23].

The stator phase resistance is calculated from the

dimensions of the machine, the number of turns in

a slot, and the cross-section of a slot

R

s

r

Cu

l

Cus

A

Cus

(28)

where

l

Cus

2N

s

(l

s

2t

p

) (29)

A

Cus

pk

sfil

bh

s

N

s

(30)

k

sl

is the slot ll factor, b

s

the slot width, and h

s

is the

slot height.

3.4 Generator with resistive load

In the tests presented in this paper, the generator is

connected to a load consisting of a parallel con-

nection of a resistor and a capacitor, as depicted in

Fig. 5.

An useful approximation of the force made by the

generator can be calculated in the following way.

The following assumptions are used:

(a) the changes in speed are so slow that the electri-

cal quantities (currents, voltages, and powers)

can be calculated for steady state;

(b) iron losses are negligible.

In steady state, the stator current phasor can be

calculated as

I

s

E

p

Z

;

Z R

s

jvL

s

R

c

jvL

c

R

l

1 jvR

l

C

l

(31)

where v is the electrical angular frequency, given by

v p

_ x

t

p

(32)

R

c

is the cable resistance, L

c

the cable inductance, R

l

the load resistance, and C

l

the capacitor connected in

parallel to the load resistance.

The values of the parameters R

s

, L

s

, R

c

, L

c

, R

l

, and C

l

and the measurement/calculation methodology

used to obtain them are described in reference [20].

From this, the force made by the generator can be

calculated as

F

g

P

g

_ x

3E

p

I

s

_ x

(33)

where I

s

is the complex conjugate of I

s

.

Figure 6 depicts the resulting calculated force as a

function of the velocity.

If the speed is not too high, the generator force is

almost linear with speed and can be approximated

by

F

GEN

b

GEN

_ x (34)

where b

GEN

is the mechanical damping due to the

Fig. 5 Equivalent circuit of the generator, the cable,

and the load

862 M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen, and H Polinder

Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy JPE284

#

IMechE 2006

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

generator given by

b

GEN

(R

AC

)

@F

GEN

( _ x, x, R

AC

)

@_ x

_ xx0

1:83 10

6

(Nsm

1

V)

R

l

R

c

R

s

(35)

4 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

4.1 Introduction

The results presented are measurements performed

on the 2nd of October of 2004, from 15:57:30 until

16:00:00 (2.5 min). At that time, the following

conditions were observed

1. Sea

(a) signicant height of the waves H

s

2:4 m;

(b) average wave period T

AV

11:5 s;

(c) tide level h

T

2:55 m.

2. AWS

(a) water volume inside AWS V

W

1180 m

3

;

(b) average air pressure inside AWS

p

a

32.35 mwc;

(c) water brakes on, the damping of the water

brakes is given by b

WB

1:42 10

6

Ns

2

=m

2

3. Landstation

(a) electrical load: resistor R

l

6V

4.2 Currents, voltages, and position

Figure 7 depicts the measured current waveforms

through the load resistance during one wave

period.

The total generator current is the sum of the load

current and the current through the load capacitors,

and can be calculated as

i

s

i

R

l

R

l

C

l

di

R

l

dt

(36)

Substituting this in equation (23) gives the no-load

voltages. The products of the no-load voltages and

the generator currents give the generator input

power. Figure 8 depicts both the power dissipated

in the load resistors and the input power of the

generator.

From the no-load voltages calculated from the

measurements, the relative position can also be

calculated, because these voltages are functions of

the position [24]. Figure 9 depicts the position

signal that has been derived in this way.

The speed is obtained by time differentiating the

position signal. The generator force may then be

obtained from the generator power by dividing it by

the speed. Figure 10 depicts the generated power

and generator force as a function of the speed. Com-

paring with Fig. 6, it appears that the damping of the

generator determined from the measurements is

larger than the theoretical damping calculated from

Fig. 6 Force of the generator with resistive load as a

function of the velocity for load resistances of

1, 3, 6, and 15 V

Fig. 7 Measured current waveforms through the load resistance during one wave period

Modelling and test results of the AWS 863

JPE284

#

IMechE 2006 Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

equation (33). This is probably caused by the fact

that the generator temperature is lower than what

it was designed for. A lower temperature leads to a

higher remanent ux density of the magnets, and

therefore to a higher voltage induced by the PMs.

From the correlation between the measurement

and the calculation, it can be concluded that the

generator model is acceptable.

4.3 Equation of motion

According to the equilibrium condition (13) and

taking into account the measured tide level and aver-

age air pressure, the equilibrium position of the

device should be x 0:7 m.

When the water volume inside AWS, the average

position and average air pressure are taken into

Fig. 8 Power dissipated in the load resistance (solid line) and power delivered by the generator

during one wave period (dashed line)

Fig. 9 Position determined from the no-load voltage

Fig. 10 Generator power and generator force as a function of generator speed

864 M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen, and H Polinder

Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy JPE284

#

IMechE 2006

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

account, the air and nitrogen spring coefcients can

be calculated using equations (15) and (16) as k

a

1:16 10

6

N/m and k

n

9 10

4

N/m.

Adding the gas springs coefcients to the hydro-

static spring coefcient k

h

7 10

5

N/m, results

in a total positive spring coefcient k 5:5

10

5

N/m and a natural period T

n

6:6 s.

Using equation (35), the damping coefcient of the

generator is calculated as b

GEN

275 kNs/m. Compar-

ing the generator damping with the water brake damp-

ing coefcient (5), it can be seen that for velocities

approximately higher than 0:18 m/s, the braking force

of the water brakes is higher than that of the generator.

Figure 11 depicts the following three

measurements.

1. The water pressure on top of the structure of AWS.

This pressure signal gives information about the

exciting wave force that drives the oater. When

the pressure signal increases the wave force acting

on the device should also increase and vice-versa.

2. The air pressure inside AWS. This pressure signal

gives information about the motion of the device

due to the compression and decompression of

the air. When the pressure reaches a maximum,

the position reaches a minimum and vice-versa.

3. The electrical current at resistor bank at the land-

station is related to the speed of the device. When

the current is high the speed is high and vice-

versa.

Just from visual inspection of the measurements

some conclusions can already be drawn.

1. The peaks of the air pressure are slightly delayed

in relation to the water pressure peaks. This

means that the extreme position of the device is

always delayed relative to the extreme values of

the exciting force. This phase shift (,908) results

from the mass spring behaviour of the device. If

the system would be in resonance with the

waves the phase shift would be 908. In this case,

Fig. 11 Measurements of water pressure, air pressure, and resistor currents

Modelling and test results of the AWS 865

JPE284

#

IMechE 2006 Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

the natural period of the mass spring system

(6.6 s) is lower than the average period of the

waves (11.5 s) and therefore the spring forces

dominate over the inertia forces, which results in

a phase shift below 908.

2. When the air pressure time derivative is high, the

electrical current is also high. This results directly

from the fact that the air pressure time derivative

is directly related to the speed of the device.

A more precise analysis can be made in order to

check the consistency and correlation between the

measured signals. One way of achieving this is by cal-

culating from each measured signal independently

Fig. 12 Absolute value of the velocity as a function of time derived from different measured

signals

866 M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen, and H Polinder

Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy JPE284

#

IMechE 2006

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

one common signal, like the velocity of the device for

instance.

The relation between the velocity of the device and

the water pressure signal is given by the dynamic

mass-spring model. By solving the differential

equation (19) excited by the water pressure signal,

the velocity signal may be recovered. The resulting

signal will however depend also on the initial con-

ditions used for the position and velocity. Since the

effect of initial conditions on the signal will decay

rapidly with time (after a few wave cycles its negli-

gible already), the initial conditions are assumed to

be zero.

The relation between the velocity of the device and

the air pressure signal is simpler and results from the

static air spring curve of the device. The air pressure

is related to the position of the device by

p

a

k

a

S

f

x

Therefore, the velocity can be calculated as

_ x

S

f

k

a

_ p

a

As explained in section 4.2, also a position signal

can be obtained from the measured currents and vol-

tages. The time derivative of this position signal also

gives a speed signal.

Figure 12 presents the absolute value of the vel-

ocity signals calculated independently from each of

the three measured signals.

From the gure, it can be seen that the signals

match quite well, specially the ones calculated from

the electrical current and the air pressure. The

main reason for this is the simplicity of the corre-

sponding models used for the velocity estimation.

The mass-spring model is however more complex,

especially the wave force estimation from the water

pressure signal. It is a non-linear function of the pos-

ition of the generator and dependent on the fre-

quency of the waves. Nevertheless even with the

simple model (see section 2.3), where most of these

non-linearities and higher order dynamics were neg-

lected, the estimated velocity still follows the other

estimated velocities signals quite well.

From these results, it can be concluded that the

derived equation for the motion of the oater is

valid. Without proper estimates of the wave forces,

the spring constants, the masses, and the damping,

there would be much larger differences between

the different velocity signals.

5 CONCLUSIONS

In this paper, a model for the motion of the oater of

the AWS has been derived. From the measurement

results, it can be concluded that a 2nd order model

ts reasonably well to the measured data, which

permit to conclude about the simplicity of the main

structure of the device dynamics. A higher order

non-linear model is however needed to achieve a

better t. Also, a generator model has been derived.

From the measurements, it can also be concluded

that this model is valid.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research project has been supported by a Marie

Curie Early Stage Research Training Fellowship

of the European Communitys Sixth Framework

Programme under contract number MRTN-CT-

2004-505166.

REFERENCES

1 Salter, S. H. Wave power. Nature, 1974, 249, 720724.

2 Clement, A., McCullen, P., Falcao, A., Fiorentino, A.,

Gardner, F., Hammarlund, K., Lemonis, G., Lewis,

T., Nielsen, K., Petroncini, S., Pontes, M.-T., Schild,

P., Sjostrom, B.-O., Srrensen, H.C., and Thorpe, T.

Wave energy in Europe: current status and perspec-

tives. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 2002, 6, 405431.

3 Thorpe, T. W. The wave energy programme in the UK

and the European wave energy network. In Proceedings

of Fourth Wave Energy Conference, Aalborg, 2000,

pp. 1927.

4 Thorpe, T. W. A brief review of wave energy. ETSU

report, R-120, DTI publication, 1999.

5 Narayanan, S. S. Y., Murthy, B. K., and Rao, G. S.

Dynamic analysis of a grid-connected induction

generator driven by a wave-energy turbine through

hunting networks. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 1999,

14, 115121.

6 Folley, M., Curran, R., Boake, C., and Whittacker, T.

Performance investigations of the LIMPET counter-

rotating Wells turbine. In Proceedings of Marine

Renewable Energy Conference, Newcastle, September

2002.

7 Pizer, D. J., Retzler, C. H., and Yemm, R. W. The OPD

Pelamis: experimental and numerical results from

the hydrodynamic work program. In Proceedings of

Fourth European Wave Energy Conference, Aalborg,

December 2000, pp. 227233.

8 Meyer, N. I. and Nielsen, K. The Danish wave energy

programme second year status. In Proceedings of

Fourth Wave Energy Conference, Aalborg, 2000,

pp. 1018.

9 Mueller, M. A. Electrical generators for direct drive

wave energy converters. IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Dis-

trib., 2002, 149, 446456.

Modelling and test results of the AWS 867

JPE284

#

IMechE 2006 Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

10 Mueller, M. A., Baker, N. J., and Spooner, E. Electrical

aspects of direct drive wave energy converters.

In Proceedings of Fourth European Wave

Energy Conference, Aalborg, December 2000, pp.

235242.

11 Mueller, M. A. and Baker, N. J. Direct drive electrical

power take-off for offshore marine energy converters.

Proc. IMechE, Part A: J. Power and Energy, 2005, 219,

223234.

12 Leijon, M., Bernhoff, H., Agren, O., Isberg, J.,

Sundberg, J., Berg, M., Karlsson, K. E., and

Wolfbrandt, A. Multiphysics simulation of wave

energy to electric energy conversion by permament

magnet linear generator. IEEE Trans. Energy convers.,

2005, 20, 219224.

13 Thorburn, K., Bernhoff, H., and Leijon, M. Wave

energy transmission system concepts for linear gen-

erator arrays. Ocean Eng., 2004, 31, 13391349.

14 Sarmento, A. J. N. A., Lu s, A. M., and Lopes, D. B. S.

Frequency-domain analysis of the AWS device. Euro-

pean Wave Energy Conference, Patras, 1998.

15 Rademakers, L. W. M. M., Van Schie, R. G., Schuitema,

R., Vriesema, B., and Gardner, F. Physical model test-

ing for characterising the AWS. European Wave Energy

Conference, Patras, 1998, pp. 192199.

16 Polinder, H., Gardner, F., and Vriesema, B. Linear PM

generator for wave energy conversion in the AWS.

In Proceedings of Eighth International Conference on

Electrical machines, Helsinki, August 2000, vol. 1,

pp. 309313.

17 Polinder, H., Damen, M. E. C., and Gardner, F.

Modelling and test results of the AWS linear PM

generator system. In Proceedings of International

Conference on Electric machines, Bruges, August

2002, paper 357.

18 Polinder, H., Damen, M. E. C., and Gardner, F. Linear

PM generator system for wave energy conversion in the

AWS. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers., 2004, 19, 583589.

19 Polinder, H., Mecrow, B. C., Jack, A. G., Dickinson, P.,

and Mueller, M. A. Linear generators for direct drive

wave energy conversion. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers.,

2005, 20, 260267.

20 Polinder, H., Damen, M. E. C., and Gardner, F. Design,

modelling and test results of the AWS PM linear

generator. Eur. Trans. Electr. Power, 2005, 15, 245256.

21 de Sousa Prado, M. G., Neumann, F., Damen, M. E. C.,

and Gardner, F. AWS results of pilot plant testing 2004.

In Proceedings of Sixth European Wave and Tidal

Energy Conference, Glasgow, 29 August2 September

2005, pp. 401407.

22 Faltinsen, O. M. Sea loads on ships and offshore struc-

tures, 1990 (Cambridge University Press).

23 Richter, R. Elektrische maschinen, erster band, 3rd

edition, 1967 (Birkhauser, Basel).

24 Polinder, H., Damen, M. E. C., Gardner, F., and

de Sousa Prado, M. G. Archimedes wave swing

linear permanent magnet generator system perform-

ance. In Proceedings of Sixth European Wave and

Tidal Energy Conference, Glasgow, 29 August

2 September 2005, pp. 383388.

868 M G de Sousa Prado, F Gardner, M Damen, and H Polinder

Proc. IMechE Vol. 220 Part A: J. Power and Energy JPE284

#

IMechE 2006

by guest on June 13, 2011 pia.sagepub.com Downloaded from

- Rating of Alternator _ Electrical4uUploaded byM Kumar Marimuthu
- my biodata.docUploaded byVishal Phirke
- REGULADOR CDVRUploaded byJonathan Javier Ceballos Bonilla
- ElectricalUploaded byNawshed Ahmed
- Electric GeneratorUploaded byDharav Jamadar
- 500 MW Generator, Salient FeaturesUploaded bySandeep Mishra
- J. Basic. Appl. Sci. Res., 2(5)4812-4819, 2012Uploaded bytrajamani
- P169Uploaded bymarcelo vallejos
- 080501 Recomended Generator ProtectionsUploaded byaltusma
- BHEL_newREPORT 2Uploaded byAshutoshSharma
- GetTRDoc.pdfUploaded byCiel Aire
- DC Generator LectureUploaded bySmirnov Artaéév
- Principle of DC GeneratorUploaded byRaghavendra Shetty
- Bicycle Pedal Power Generator FAQ Frequently Asked Questions.pdfUploaded byryan
- AvK Project guideUploaded byVito Digeo
- c 10551757Uploaded byAlejandro Salas Vásquez
- naval-technology-brochure-en.pdfUploaded byFELIXDEJ
- Training Machine1, Homework in electrical machinesUploaded byNGOUNE
- 5-2011-bUploaded byDheeraj Yadav
- GE NEF 100 MUploaded byNguyễn Đức Lợi
- power electrical past paperUploaded byNadeesha Bandara
- Big Ideas - Electromagnetism and ElectronicsUploaded byKhushal Gupta
- Optimal.pdfUploaded byjalilemadi
- KOHLER 300KWUploaded bymaguitum
- 10 Short Notes EUploaded byFasal Peringolam Calicut
- Capit-14- Glosario de TerminosUploaded byWilliam Ruiz
- Industrial Equipment.pdfUploaded byteknikpembakaran2013
- RR310205-ELECTROMECHANICSUploaded bysivabharathamurthy
- davisyolangcomachineriesUploaded byapi-26570979
- Amplidyne GeneratorUploaded byMohammed El-Awamry

- Manual PlscaddUploaded byKingFish777
- ProteccionTrafoUploaded byf6m2l5
- NORMAS ELECTRICAS OFICIALESUploaded byjano_rdr
- Tutorial Pls CaddUploaded byPaulo CL
- Dynamic Modeling and Simulation Analysis on Micro-grid Based on DIgSILENTUploaded byjano_rdr
- Control de Tension EolicaUploaded byjano_rdr
- Control PQ y PV.pdfUploaded byjano_rdr
- (Archivos Comtrade) CD-4177Uploaded byjano_rdr
- IDAE-Pliego de Condiciones Técnicas de Instalaciones AisladasUploaded bysanmartinj

- Butterfly CalculationUploaded byangga
- Math_skills Pascals PrincipleUploaded byMaridjan Wiwaha
- Specification Jumbo Drill Sandvik DD311D-40ECUploaded byNathania Boas E S
- Hot tapping MachineUploaded bydanigna77
- Marc/Mentat documentationUploaded byبلقاسم جلالي
- Modeling Beam-Column Joints in Fragility Assessment of Gravity Load Designed Reinforced Concrete FramesUploaded byAžar Pl
- Damping Mass in Mountain Bike SuspensionUploaded byAnonymous rFxZ3JUUi
- Me2301 Thermal EngineeringUploaded byskings1264
- PEFY-P15~96NMHU-E_Submittal[1]Uploaded bymeceng
- Survey Paper on Analysis of Flat Slab Resting on shear wallsUploaded byIRJET Journal
- PHAK - Chapter 03Uploaded byernestclaytonuhp
- Induction Motor (BEE)Uploaded byKaushik Patnaik
- PCK, PHK Packaged Unit IO ManualUploaded byChad Henson
- 808 Power Mizer Blowers Industrial Process ApplicationsUploaded byGustavo276
- Fs 1028mfp Dp 110 PartsUploaded byAndrey Khodanitski
- Chapter 3Uploaded byAINOKEARIDER
- Simulation of Flow Inside Heat Pipe (2)Uploaded byshahhardikd
- Crack Band ModelUploaded bysalo
- DOCUMENTAÇÃO TÉCNICA AC SANYOUploaded byFigovsky Lopez
- StudDynamics of StructuresUploaded byRuben Iggen
- Chapter 19Uploaded byrahul
- JEM0001-2 Overhaul ManualUploaded byRicardo Urio
- DG testUploaded byafaq
- Engine HistoryUploaded byFelipe Sierra
- Large Eddy SimulationUploaded bybdiaconu20048672
- Annex 2 - Pull Out TestUploaded byGayan Indunil
- RSS_PartC1_Ch01_2014-07.pdfUploaded byCastoriadis
- Cfm56 TestUploaded byRicardo Ccoyure Tito
- Fabrication of Pneumatic Punching and Riveting MachineUploaded byElakkiya Karthic
- U 14 Operating Manual HCR Vol IUploaded byAnonymous 9XwIp5C