See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325466651

WELLS AND IMPULSE TURBINES IN AN OWC WAVE POWER PLANT: A

COMPARISON

Conference Paper · September 2005

CITATIONS READS

7 381

3 authors, including:

Mattia Scuotto Antonio Falcao

6 PUBLICATIONS   192 CITATIONS   
Technical University of Lisbon
146 PUBLICATIONS   4,956 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

OPERA (EU H2020 project) View project

Development of oscillating-water-column wave energy converters and new types of air turbines View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mattia Scuotto on 31 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 WELLS AND IMPULSE TURBINES
IN AN OWC WAVE POWER PLANT: A COMPARISON
Mattia Scuotto1, António F. de O. Falcão2
1
Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
2
Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal
Abstract
The aim is to compare the performances of a given
Oscillating Water Column (in given wave climate)
when equipped with two different types of air
turbines: a Wells turbine and an impulse turbine.
Comparisons between these two types of turbine
have been published by some authors. These works
were mainly focused on aerodynamic performances:
if a comparison is to be meaningful it should address
the overall performance of the plant the turbine
equips, since it is known that the turbine
aerodynamics affects the hydrodynamic process of
wave energy absorption at the beginning of the
energy conversion chain, and the quality of the
produced electrical power at the end. The results
obtained in numerical simulations put in evidence
some inherent limits of both machines when adopted
as power take-off system in OWC devices and may
address further investigations.
Introduction
The Oscillating Water Column (OWC) device is a
first generation wave power plant, of which some
full-sized shoreline prototypes have been built as
research facilities. The energy conversion chain from
wave power to electricity is divided into three stages:
wave power → pneumatic power → mechanical
power → electrical power. Assuming this scheme,
the present work can be regarded as a comparison
between two energy chains that differ from each
other in the turbine element. Each conversion step
requires the proper sub-device. The action of the
incident waves causes oscillations of the water
column, within the submerged part of the inner
structure, which in turn induces variations of
pressure in the air chamber of the device. In an
OWC, the mechanical power take-off system consists
of a self-rectifying axial-flow air turbine, located in a
duct connecting the air chamber with outside
atmosphere. A self-rectifying turbine has the
capability to operate without a system of self-
rectifying valves, accepting instead the air-flow from
both sides while rotating always in the same
direction. Hence, these turbines do usually have both
rotor blades and guide vanes (if adopted)
symmetrical with respect to a cross-sectional plane
perpendicular to the shaft axis. The turbomachine
drives a variable-speed generator rotor. The turbine
probably represents the most critical element in the
energy conversion process; it is essential to optimise
its performance, subject to cost-related constraints.
Although the Wells turbine has been chosen to equip
most of the full-sized devices built so far, other types
of self-rectifying air turbines have been developed
for wave energy conversion purposes. The Wells
turbine and, more recently, the impulse turbine are,
by far, the most studied and investigated (although
not the only ones), theoretically as well as
experimentally. Dimensionless aerodynamic
performance curves for the Wells turbine and for the
impulse turbine were taken from published testing
data (in both cases with 0.6m-rotor-diameter models
and with analogous test rigs). The numerical
simulations were performed in the time domain for
the non-linear impulse turbine and with a stochastic
model for the approximately linear Wells turbine.
The spring-like effect due to air compressibility in
the chamber was taken into account in a linearized
form. The computations involved a set of rotor
diameters for each turbine type. In every case, the
rotational speed was optimised for each sea state
(subject to maximum rotor blade tip speed
constraints). We wish to remark that in present work
only the aerodynamic losses, implicit in the
efficiency curves of the turbines, were taken into
account. In both cases, we may identify at least four
other major sources of losses involved in the process:
hydrodynamic viscous loss in the chamber, air-flow
hysteresis loop, bearing friction and the electrical
losses in the generator rotor. These losses, not
accounted for in the calculations presented here, are
estimated to reduce the power output by 20-30%.
Simulation environment
The Pico (Azores, Portugal) OWC plant was used in
the simulations: its hydrodynamic coefficients
(excitation volume-flow Γ(ω), radiation conductance
B(ω) and radiation susceptance C(ω)) were known
from published results computed with a boundary
element code (AQUADYN) (Brito-Melo, 2001). The
shoreline plant has a concrete structure (of 12×12 m
internal square cross-section at free surface level)
that spans a natural gully whose depth is about 8 m.
Irregular waves were considered in the simulations.
Two different wave climates were used in the
comparisons. The wave climates were represented by
a set of 44 sea states, each sea state being
characterized by its Pierson-Moskowitz spectral
power distribution, with the significant wave height
HS and the energy period Te , and its frequency of
occurrence φ. The local wave climate (a
representation of which is given in Figure 1) results
from wave measurements at the plant’s location in
conjunction with longer-term results from
forecast/hindcast numerical modelling for the same
ocean area. Average wave power level is about 15
kW/m. In order to simulate and compare
performances in a more energetic environment, a
second wave climate, characterised by twice the
power, was created based on the original one by
simply multiplying, for each sea state, the value of
the significant wave height HS by 2.
Figure 1 – Local wave climate, represented by 44 sea
states (HS , Te). The area of each circle is
proportional to the contribution of the sea state to the
total annual wave energy.
Numerical modelling of the Wells turbine
The reference machine equips the Pico plant and has
an 8-bladed rotor of D=2.3 m outer diameter and
Di=1.36 m inner diameter, with a row of guide vanes
on each side of the rotor. The blade chord is constant
(0.375 m) and its cross-section varies continuously
from profile NACA 0015 at the hub to NACA 0012
at the tip. Five different diameter sizes, from D=2.0
m to D=3.8 m, were used in simulations. It is
convenient to introduce dimensionless variables to
characterise the aerodynamic performance, namely
the non-dimensional pressure head Ψ=p/(ρaN2D2),
the non-dimensional flow-rate Φ=µ/(ρaND3) and the
non-dimensional power output Π=ηΦΨ. (Here, N is
the rotational speed in radians per unit time, ρa the
constant value of the air density, µ the mass flow rate
through the turbine and p the pressure oscillation in
the chamber).
Figure 2 – Dimensionless plot of Wells turbine
power output versus pressure-head: Π(Ψ) (solid
line), Π(σΨ) without valve control (dashed line) and
with valve control (chain line). (Falcão et al., 1998)
Figure 3 – Efficiency of the Wells turbine versus
pressure-head: η(Ψ) (solid line), η(σΨ) without valve
control (dashed line) and with valve control (chain
line). (Falcão et al., 1998)
If the Reynolds number and the Mach number effects
are assumed negligible, then the dimensional analysis
applied to incompressible flow turbomachinery
allows us to write Π=fP(Ψ) and Φ=fQ(Ψ), the
functions depending only on turbine shape and not
on its size or rotational speed. The dimensionless
characteristics, along with some derived curves
which are explained below, are reported in Figure 2
(dimensionless power output Π versus pressure-head
Ψ) and Figure 3 (efficiency η). The maximum Πmax
is reached at Ψcrit=0.067, the pressure-head critical
value beyond which aerodynamic stalling occurs at
the rotor blades, resulting in severe drop in
efficiency. The Wells turbine is characterised by
high rotational speed. Since the blade tip-speed has
to be constrained (limiting the rotational speed to
about 1500 rpm in the case of D=2.3 m) in order to
avoid shock waves at blades tip, the stalling occurs
even with moderately energetic sea conditions
because of the high flow-rate caused by the pressure
difference. This must be avoided by providing, for
example, the plant with a relief valve. The result is a
less severe downfall of the overall efficiency as sea
power level increases (another solution, though
mechanically more complicated, is represented by the
improved version of the Wells turbine with variable pressure oscillation. On the other hand, the available
pitch-blades). pneumatic power to the turbine is
The straight line Φ=K×Ψ=0.6803×Ψ was found to µ
Pavai (t ) = p (t ) (7)
be a good approximation to the curve of the ρa
dimensionless flow-rate Φ=Φ(Ψ) and for this reason and the ratio of Pt(t) to Pavai(t) yields the expression
the machine is said to be linear, that is the ratio of for the turbine efficiency, that is the efficiency of the
mass flow-rate to pressure fluctuation is constant for central step in the energy conversion process
a Wells turbine of given geometry at given rotational Pt (t ) Π
speed, µ/p=KD/N. A proportionality relationship (at η (t ) = = . (8)
Pavai (t ) ΨΦ
constant rotational speed) between turbine flow rate The average available power is
Φ and pressure head Ψ is a basic assumption ∞
pµ ⎛ p2 ⎞
∫
1
underlying the whole analysis based on the stochastic P avai = exp⎜ − ⎟dp (9)
methods developed by Falcão (Falcão, 2002), to 2π σ p ρa ⎜ 2σ p ⎟
−∞ ⎝ ⎠
which we remand for further details. whose dimensionless form is
It was assumed that the local wave climate may be ∞
⎛ Ψ2 ⎞
∫
1
represented by a set of sea states, each being a Π avai = f Q (Ψ ) exp⎜ − ⎟dΨ (10)
stationary stochastic ergodic process. Hence, the 2π σ Ψ ⎜ 2σ 2 ⎟
−∞ ⎝ Ψ ⎠
probability density function of sea surface elevation ς Then, under the assumption of the linear relationship
at a fixed observation point is supposed to be
Φ=KΨ, it could be proved that the expression (10)
Gaussian with variance
∞
for the average available power may be easily turned

∫ Sζ (ω )dω
into
σ ζ2 = (1)
Π avai = K ⋅ σ Ψ
2 (11)
−∞
where ω is radian frequency and Sς(ω) is a two sided Thus, the average efficiency of the turbine is
spectral density (per unit radian frequency Π Π
η= = (12)
bandwidth). Π avai Kσ Ψ
2

The assumptions made, together with the adoption of The curves represented by equations (6), (10) and
linear water wave theory and the modelling of the (12) turned out to be more useful when dealing with
spring-like effect of air in the chamber by a real random waves.
linearised isentropic relationship between air The method presented above is computationally
pressure and density, lead to a fully linear system much less time consuming if compared to the
whose pressure oscillation p(t) has a Gaussian traditional time domain analysis, but can be applied
distribution with variance given by only to linear systems. However, if the aerodynamic
∞
stalling occurs (as the pressure-head becomes larger
∫
2
σ 2p = 2 Sζ (ω ) Γ(ω )Λ (ω ) dω (2) than ψcrit ), the system ceases to behave linearly
0 (experimental results on the Wells turbine show that
−1
⎛ ⎛ KD ⎞ ⎛ ωV ⎞⎞ the flow-rate/pressure-head linear approximation is
Λ = ⎜ ⎜⎜ + B(ω ) ⎟⎟ + i⎜⎜ 0 + C (ω ) ⎟⎟ ⎟ (3) no longer valid). In the numerical simulations the
⎜ ρ N p γ ⎟
⎝⎝ a ⎠ ⎝ a ⎠⎠ presence of an ideal relief valve has been simply
where V0 is the undisturbed air chamber volume, γ is simulated by replacing the actual value of turbine
specific heat ratio for the air and pa is the instantaneous power output Pt with the maximum
atmospheric pressure. From the expression of the power the turbine can produce Pt,MAX=ρaN3maxD5Πcrit
instantaneous turbine power output when Ψ >Ψcrit . The curves of the average values of
P(t )t = ρ a N 3 D 5 f P (Ψ (t ) ) (4) the power output and the efficiency are modified as
the expression for the average value of the turbine shown in Figure 2 and 3. A properly designed set of
power output is derived, according to the assumed real valves can approximate the behaviour of an ideal
pressure distribution properties valve. Implementation of such devices leads to
∞ ⎛ p2 ⎞ reliability and mainteinance-related problems.
exp⎜ − ⎟ f (Ψ ( p ) )dp
1
Pt =
2π σ p ∫ ⎜ 2σ 2 ⎟ P
(5) The present procedure is aimed to maximize the plant
−∞ ⎝ p⎠ annual energy production. This aim is achieved, in
or, in dimensionless form, each individual sea state, by assigning the turbine a
∞ constant rotational speed N, chosen to match sea
⎛ Ψ2 ⎞
⎟ f P (Ψ )dΨ
∫
1
Π= exp⎜ − (6) conditions in order to maximize the produced energy.
2π σ Ψ ⎜ 2σ 2 ⎟ However, the turbine’s rotational speed is subject to
−∞ ⎝ Ψ ⎠
the constraint ND<2Mmaxca , where ca is sound speed
where σΨ=σp/(ρaN2D2) and Π = Pt /(ρaN3D5). in normal air conditions and Mmax is maximum
Equations (5) and (6) represent the turbine power allowable Mach number (usually 0.5-0.6). If φj is the
output as a function of the root-mean-square of the frequency of occurrence of the j-th sea state, then the
maximum of average annual power output produced
is given by
44
∑ Pt ,max ⋅ φ j
ann ( j)
P t , max = (13)
j =1
Numerical modelling of the impulse turbine
The reference machine model (built and tested by
Thakker et al., University of Limerick) has a 30-
bladed rotor of D=0.6 m outer diameter and a hub-to-
tip ratio of 0.6, with a row of 26 plate (no airfoil
profile) guide-vanes on each side. Rotor blade
sections at mean blade-height exhibit an elliptical
profile at the suction surface and circular profile at
the pressure surface. Chord length is 0.1 m. The
geometry was designed following optimisation
criteria (for further detail see Setoguchi et al., 2000).
The published experimental data, taken from
(Thakker et al., 2003) and (Thakker et al., 2004), was
extended by the authors by linearly extrapolating the
curve of the efficiency down to zero, (based the
highest flow rate experimental points), and beyond Ψ
= 1.77 the non-dimensional power output was
assumed to be zero. Six different diameters were
used in simulations, from D=1.2 m to D=2.7 m.
Figure 4 – Impulse turbine, non-dimensional power
output versus non-dimensional pressure head.
Fgure 5 – Impulse turbine, efficiency versus non-
dimensional pressure-head.
The impulse turbine is non-linear, in the sense that
the linear relationship between Φ and Ψ is no longer
valid and must be replaced by the experimental curve
Φ=fQ(Ψ). As a consequence, the stochastic method
cannot be applied and had to be replaced a more
traditional time domain analysis. Thus, the time-
average of the observed behaviour of the turbine in
given conditions for a reasonably long time interval
(several minutes) here represents the power out of
the plant in those conditions (namely, sea state and
rotational speed).
The same assumptions as before were kept on what
concerns linear wave theory and the linear isentropic
relationship for air compressibility in the chamber.
Compressibility (Mach number) effects of the air-
flow through the turbine were neglected (a single
curve for the machine efficiency was assumed). The
equation to be integrated is (remember that
p=ρaN2D2Ψ and µ=ρaN2D2Φ )
t
V0 dp µ(t)
paγ dt
− ∫ gr (t −τ ) p(τ )dτ + ρa − qd (t ) = 0 (14)
−∞
the symbols assuming here the same meaning as
before and ρa is an averaged value of the air density
over a sufficiently long period of time (say, ten or
twenty times the energy period). (Variations in the
instantaneous value of ρa in the turbine flow were
ignored, in spite of the occurrence of relatively large
pressure peaks in the more energetic sea states.) The
radiation and diffraction flow rates are, respectively
t
qr (t ) = ∫ gr (t − τ ) p(τ )dτ (15)
−∞
N
Anωn
qi (t ) = 2b ∑ kn
sin( 2k n a ) cos(ωn t + θ n ) (16)
n =1
where An is the n-th wave component amplitude, kn
the wave number and θn the phase, while N is the
number of regular waves whose superposition gives
the irregular sea surface of given sea state. The
function gr(t) in the convolution integral is a function
that depends on system geometry and is defined as
the inverse Fourier transform of the positive and real-
valued function B(ω)
∞
2
g r (t ) =
π ∫ B(ω ) cos(ωt )dω. (17)
0
In numerical simulations, the diffraction flow rate
was computed directly from the wave power
spectrum, with 225 wave components, and a random
number generation routine was implemented to
ensure random phases. The convolution integral (15)
was truncated to t-30 s (t = present time), limiting the
system memory to half a minute, to save
computational time without significant loss in
accuracy. For given diameter and rotational speed,
the integration of equations (14)-(16) was performed
numerically using a trapezoidal rule with a time step
of 0.1 s. The integration interval was limited to 9000
points, corresponding to 15 minutes. For a given
turbine size and sea state, the rotational speed Nopt
that ensured the maximum average power output was
searched within a proper interval N*opt+∆N , whose
central value N*opt is the optimal rotational speed
computed applying the stochastic method (in almost
all cases the difference Nopt - N*opt was significant).
On what concerns the limit of maximum blade tip-
speed, a constraint analogous to that of the Wells
turbine was adopted. However, NoptD/2 never
exceeded this limit, allowing the turbine to be
properly tuned to whichever matched sea conditions.
The average annual produced power is then given by
equation (13).
Results and further analysis
In order to compare results obtained with the two
different approaches, we had to prove that with both
methods (time domain and frequency domain) the
performances of the Wells turbine were equally
predicted. Several simulations in time domain with
Wells turbines of various sizes in very different sea
states were done and the results showed differences,
with respect to stochastic methods, in average power
output not exceeding about 2-3%.
In Figure 6 the results for average annual power
output are presented. Though in both climates the
competition for maximum produced power is won by
the Wells turbines, it is clear that the size of these
machines is considerably larger. Looking at the left-
Figure 6 – Turbine average annual power output versus diameter size, in both considered wave climates.
Impulse turbines performance is represented by left-hand curves, Wells turbines are on the right-hand side.
hand rising branch of the four curves, it can be seen
that, for the same time-averaged power output, the
impulse turbine is significantly smaller than the
Wells turbine (in terms of rotor diameter). Also
keeping into account that the plant equipped with a
Wells turbine must be provided with a set of active
relief valves, this would lead to reconsider the
impulse turbine when maximum profit (rather than
maximum energy production) is searched for. For a
brief introduction to the subject and some results, see
(Falcão, 2003) and (Scuotto, 2004). Another thing
that should be noted in Figure 6 is that the impulse
turbine type seems to gain more advantage from
increased power availability: the position of the
upper curve (double power wave climate) with repect
to the lower one (local wave climates) shows in
average a higher increase, in percentage terms, of
power output if compared with the two Wells turbine
type curves. Further investigations were done on the
subject by selecting a turbine of each type and
running simulations (time domain) with very
energetic sea conditions. Diameter D=1.8 m was
chosen for the impulse turbine, D=2.3 m for the
Wells turbine, the two machine being comparable
from the point of view of the power output in both
wave climates. Results are shown in Figures 7 and 8.
The absence of limiting constraints on rotational
speed would seem to grant the impulse turbine an
almost unlimited power production capability as the
available sea power increases, which is not realistic.

Figure 7 – 2.3 m Wells turbine (chain line) and 1.8
m impulse turbine (solid line) average power output
in different sea states with fixed wave height (5 m);
Ej represents power per meter of wave crest.
Figure 7 – 2.3 m Wells turbine (chain line) and 1.8
m impulse turbine (solid line) average power output
in different sea states with fixed energy period (10
s); Ej represents power per metre of wave crest.
Figure 9 shows the Mach number as a function of
time in a critical section of the machine, an impulse
turbine of diameter D=1.5 m, in three different sea
states chosen from local climate.
The curves were obtained after modifying the
program used for time domain analysis: integration
time step is 0.01 s, air density ρ(t) is a function of
time as well as the rotational speed N(t) which is
controlled by an algorithm that set the proper
instantaneous electromagnetic torque that has to be
Figure 9 – Impulse turbine, D=1.5 m; Mach number at the outlet edge of the first row of guide-vanes in three
diffrent sea states taken from local climate: HS=1.56m, Te=7.93s (solid line), HS=3.25m, Te=11.5s (dashed line),
HS=4.25m, Te=14.5s (chain line). Annual contribution to energy production can be extimated from Figure 1.
developed by the generator rotor (Falcão, 2002-b),
derived by integrating the equation that expresses
the dynamic of the system, for example
dN Pt (t )
I = − 0.0592 × N (t ) 2.5375 (18)
dt N (t )
where I is turbine inertia in kg/m2 and the second
term on the right-hand side is the requested
electromagnetic torque as a function of N(t). The
exponent and the number that multiplies the
rotational speed are determined by interpolating the
pairs (Nopt , Pt,max) obtained in several sea states
with a turbine of given size (in equation (18) are
reported the values computed with diameter
D=1.8m using the performance at constant N in the
44 sea states of the local wave climate).
The graph in Figure 9 suggests that compressibility
effects of the air in the case of the impulse turbine
may turn out not to be negligible beyond a certain
wave power level. Possibly this could occur and be
significant in the more energetic wave climate
simulated here.
Conclusions
The impulse turbine was tested with a constant
axial air velocity slightly below 10 m/s and with
rotational speeds ranging from about 100 to about
1250 rpm (Thakker et al., 2003 and 2004). The
Reynolds number was assumed large enough for
Reynolds effects to be negligible. Possibly due to
inherent limits of the experimental facilitiy, in the
tests the air-flow Mach number was kept low.
Curves for the efficiency and other dimensionless
characteristics may result different at higher values
of the Mach number. By means of a more complex
theoretical analysis some significative corrections
are possible. However the prediction of the impulse
turbine aerodynamic performance at high Mach
numbers (i.e. in highly energetic sea states) is
unreliable without further turbine testing at
appropriate Mach numbers.
 A. Thakker, T.S. Dhanasekaran, 2003. ”Computed
Nomenclature
effects of tip clearance on performance of
ω radian frequency impulse turbine for wave energy conversion”,
HS characteristic wave height Renewable Energy 29 529-547.
Te energy period
φ frequency of occurrence A. Thakker, F. Hourigan, 2004. “Modelling and
p relative pressure scaling of the impulse turbine for wave power
ρ air density applications”, Renewable Energy 29 305-317.
µ mass-flow rate
A. Thakker, Z. Usmani, T.S. Dhanasekaran, 2004.
D turbine diameter
“Effects of turbine damping on performance of
N rotational speed (rad/s)
an impulse turbine for wave energy conversion
Pt power output
under different sea conditions using numerical
Pavai available power
simulation techniques”, Renewable Energy 29
k wave number
2133-2151.
Ψ dimensionless pressure-head
Φ dimensionless flow rate M. Scuotto, 2004. “Wells and impulse turbines in
Π dimensionless power output an OWC wave power plant: a preliminary
σX variance of quantity X comparison”, Master Thesis, Università degli
η efficiency Studi di Padova, Italy.
B, C, Γ hydrodynamic coefficients
X average value of quantity X

Acknowledgements
The present paper is based on the first author’s
Master thesis work (Scuotto, 2004), partly carried
out while he was at the Instituto Superior Técnico
(Lisbon, Portugal) under the supervision of
Professor António Falcão.

Corresponding the author: mattia.scuotto@gmail.com .

References
A. Brito-Melo, 2001. Thèse de Doctorat (PhD
Thesis) – Université de Nantes (Nantes,
France) / Instituto Superior Técnico (Lisbon,
Portugal).
A. F. de O. Falcão, P.A.P. Justino, 1998. “OWC
wave energy devices with air flow control”,
Ocean Engineering 26 1275-1295.
A.F. de O. Falcão, 2002. “Stochastic modelling of
OWC wave power plant performance”,
Applied Ocean Research, 24 59-71.
A.F. de O. Falcão, 2002. “Control of an OWC
wave power plant for maximum energy
production”, Applied Ocean Research 24 73-
82.
A.F. de O. Falcão, 2003. “Maximum energy
production and maximum profit as alternative
criteria for wave power equipment
optimization”, 5th European Wave Energy
Conference, Cork, Ireland, September 2003.
T. Setoguchi, M. Takao, S. Santhakumar, K.
Kaneko, H. Maeda., 2001. “A review of
impulse turbine for wave energy conversion”,
Renewable Energy 23 261-292.

View publication stats