Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Influence of the shape of a buoy on the efficiency of its dual-motion

wave energy conversion
Mahdi Nazari Berenjkoob a, b, Mahmoud Ghiasi a, *, C.Guedes Soares b
a
Department of Maritime Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
b
Centre for Marine Technology and Ocean Engineering (CENTEC), Instituto Superior T
ecnico, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A procedure is proposed for the geometric design of the buoy of a single-body wave energy converter
Received 20 May 2020 (WEC) based on the characteristics of incident waves. The effect of the buoy shape on its hydrodynamic
Received in revised form performance and the absorption efficiency of WEC model is considered. The model absorbs the wave
22 September 2020
energy through the dual motion (heave and surge) of the buoy. In order to compare the dynamics of
Accepted 2 October 2020
Available online 7 October 2020
various buoys in waves, a set of requirements is proposed to create identical conditions. Three groups of
buoy geometry, including conical, spherical and unusual geometry are considered. The changes in the
hydrodynamic parameters of the buoy due to the buoy shape variations are studied to clarify the effect of
Keywords:
Geometric design
these changes on the efficiency of the WEC model. The obtained results show that increasing a ratio of
Shape effect hydrodynamic coefficients of the buoy, increases the produced power regardless of the wave frequency.
Dual motion Also, an appropriate shape for the buoy can raise the WEC model performance from suboptimal mode to
Buoy appropriate shape optimal mode and would also lead to a significant increase in the absorbed power and efficiency.
Parametric sensitivity © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Credit author statement
Mahdi Nazari Berenjkoob, Conceptualization, Methodology,
Numerical analysis, Investigation, Formal analysis, Validation, Data
curation, Resources, Writing - original draft. Mahmoud Ghiasi, Su-
pervision, Project administration, Methodology, Writing - review &
editing. C. Guedes Soare, Methodology, Formal analysis, Resources,
Writing - review & editing.
1. Introduction
Energy of the sea waves is a promising renewable resource that
can be considered as a stable supply of energy, specifically on the
islands and far-off residential areas. Generally, in a WEC device,
wave energy can be extracted through the reaction forces between
two bodies, in which at least one body interacts with the waves and
the other body is a submerged body or a fixed body that interacts
against the seabed [1]. Examples are the PowerBuoy, the WaveBob,
the Aquabuoy, the IPS-buoy, FO3, and the Lysekil buoy of Uppsala
University, which have the oscillating absorber buoy. These devices
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mehdi.nazari@aut.ac.ir (M.N. Berenjkoob), mghiasi@aut.ac.ir
(M. Ghiasi), c.guedes.soares@centec.tecnico.ulisboa.pt (C.Guedes Soares).
are commonly known as the point-absorber converters [2].
Most point-absorber WEC devices are still in the pre-
commercial stage and their production costs should be reduced
by optimization. The efficiency of the WEC depends on the motion
of bodies and the reaction of the power take-off (PTO) system,
specifically the motion of the buoy along a given direction [3].
Therefore, the absorber buoy of these converters plays an impor-
tant role in the process of wave energy absorption. The buoy mo-
tion in waves depends on the buoy shape and dimensions as well as
the incident wave characteristics. Improving the motion behavior
of the buoy via optimizing its shape or dimensions is a well-known
procedure to increase the efficiency of these converters [1,4]. There
are also other procedures for improving the efficiency of the WECs
via optimizing the PTO system [5], submerged body geometry, and
mooring system, specifically the mechanisms to improve the PTO
system.
Beir~
ao and Malça [6] investigated the dynamics of a conical,
spherical, and horizontal-cylindrical buoys. It should be noted that,
radius and mass of these three buoys were not the same. Therefore,
the conditions of the comparison made between the buoys were
not identical according to the motion equation of the floating body.
In another research by Pastor and Liu [7], the dynamics of two
buoys (conical and hemispherical) under identical wave excitations
were studied in order to optimize a point-absorber WEC. The two

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.118998
0360-5442/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

buoys had the same radius, but different mass. Also, a numerical
simulation was performed by Backer et al. [8] using WAMIT to
improve the performance of a heaving point-absorber WEC. They
focused on one hemispherical buoy and two conical buoys at 45

and 30
. These three buoys also had the same radius, but different
mass. The different mass of these buoys has made unequal condi-
tions for comparing their performance.
In addition to the aforementioned studies, Amiri et al. [9]
compared the efficiency of four buoy shapes with the same mass
and different radius in wave energy absorption process. Their
approach for selecting the radius and mass of the buoys was the
inverse of the approach described by Pastor and Liu [7] and Backer
et al. [8]. According to the motion equation of the floating body, the
mass and water-plane area (or the hydrostatic restoring force) and
also the hydrodynamic parameters of the floating body affect the
body motions in the wave. Consequently, to compare the dynamics
of some buoys, their mass and water-plane area should be identical.
In the above studies [6e8], the approach used for comparing the
dynamics of the buoys with different shapes did not ensure the
identical conditions in the process of this comparison. Actually, in
these papers, the hydrodynamics of some buoy geometries was
investigated for different aims and in different conditions, in which
the buoys had the same radius, but unequal mass or vice-versa. Due
to the existing differences in environmental conditions, character-
istics of incident waves and the dimensions of buoys, the obtained
results in the aforementioned studies cannot be compared with
each other.
This paper presents a design algorithm to select the suitable
dimensions for the wave energy absorbing buoy based on the
characteristics of incident waves through some requirements.
Then, some buoys in different shapes are designed so that the
conditions of buoy analysis and comparison are identical. In other
words, in practice, the characteristics of the assumed waves
determine the range of absorption bandwidth and consequently,
the range of natural frequency of the buoy. Then, such certain
natural frequency and the simple geometry for the buoy determine
the appropriate mass and radius for absorbing the maximum en-
ergy within the assumed wave ranges. Afterwards, the buoy shape
is optimized for the fixed mass and radius. This procedure is
different compared to the aforementioned studies. Moreover, three
identical parameters (mass, water-plane area, and natural fre-
quency) were simultaneously considered for the design of any new
shape for the buoy. Finally, the obtained results introduced two
hydrodynamic parameters to design a suitable shape of the buoy
(regardless of incident wave frequency), while the optimal radius
and mass were already calculated based on the wave
characteristics.
Different shapes can also be selected for the buoy. A rigid rod is
attached to the mass center of the buoy and the PTO (Fig. 1). The
effects of marine currents, tidal oscillations, and friction inside the
PTO system are ignored and the non-linear effects are also not
considered. This study compares the energy absorption character-
istics of the different shapes of buoys and this occurs mainly in low
and moderate sea states where linear response is appropriate. Of
course the final design of any concept will need to study its sur-
vivability in extreme waves, which can only be made accounting for
the nonlinear effects. There are different methods that can be used
to calculate these nonlinear effects, such as those performed by
Giorgi and Ringwood [13] and Lo
pez et al. [14].
2.2. The PTO system
As shown in Fig. 1, the PTO system is modeled by a linear spring
and a linear damper that are mounted in parallel. Stiffness and
damping coefficients (Kpto and Cpto ), which are the specifications of
PTO, affect the motion behavior of the buoy and absorbed power.
The equation for the absorbed power is obtained [11] as follows:
1

Pabs ¼ u2 Cpto D[ 2 ; D[ ¼ f Kpto ; u; x; z; … (1)
2
The parameterD[, which is the change in the length of the spring
and damper (Fig. 1), depends on the heave, surge and pitch motions
of the buoy. The parameter u is the wave frequency. Hence, the
absorbed power will be a function of the buoy motions, wave fre-
quency and the PTO specifications. The stiffness and damping co-
efficients of the PTO can be optimized for a specified buoy and in
each wave frequency. The PTO optimal coefficients in heave motion
(Kpto optimal ; Cpto optimal ) in wave of frequency u are obtained [11,15]
as follows:
Kpto optimal ðuÞ ¼ u2 ½m þ A33 ðuÞ  khys
(2)
Cpto optimal ðuÞ ¼ B33 ðuÞ
where khys and m are the hydrostatic restoring coefficient and mass
of the buoy, respectively. The subscript 33 refers to heave motion.
The parameters A33 and B33 are the hydrodynamic added-mass and

2. Case study

In this paper, some aspects including, the design of the buoy, the
comparison conditions of the buoys dynamics, the effect of buoy
shape variations on its motions and hydrodynamic parameters, and
the impact of the buoy’s hydrodynamic coefficients on the ab-
sorption efficiency of a WEC model are studied.

2.1. The model

In a point-absorber WEC, a linear generator system or a hy-

draulic circuit system with a rotary generator is used. These two
systems are known as the PTO system, where captured wave en-
ergy is converted into electricity. The PTO system was modeled as a
linear spring-damper system in Refs. [10e12].
In this paper, the model includes an absorber buoy and a linear Fig. 1. Schematic of the model with three degree-of-freedom; the heave, pitch, and
PTO system that is connected between a fixed point and the buoy. surge motions.

2
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares
damping coefficients of the buoy in heave, respectively, that
depend on the buoy geometry in each wave [16]. Here, the pa-
rameters khys and m are identical for all the designed buoys, so the
optimal coefficients of the PTO are only dependent on the buoy
hydrodynamic coefficients (the buoy geometry) in each wave.
2.3. Equation of motion
As expected, the highest power production is captured when all
the three motion modes, surge, heave, and pitch are used in the
energy absorption process. However, the difference between using
surge and heave instead of using these three motion modes is small
[17]. Also, the combination of the heave and surge motions im-
proves the efficiency of the absorber buoy compared to other dual-
mode combinations [1,17]. Hence, in this paper, the heave and surge
motions are studied as the dual effective motion of the buoy.
According to the model illustrated in Fig. 1, the PTO is considered
to be attached to the center of the buoy’s mass through the rigid
rod, and thus, the pitch motion is ineffective on the D[ parameter.
As a result, this parameter depends on the dual effective motion of
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the buoy and it is equal to D[ ¼ x2 þ ðz þ LÞ2  L. The horizontal
and vertical displacements of the buoy’s center (x; z) is much
smaller compared to the rod’s constant length (Ly h). Hence, the
angle between the rod and vertical direction will be a small angle,
so we can assume that cos qy1 and sin qyx=L. The PTO force
_ By considering regular waves and
is Fpto ¼ Kpto D[ þ Cpto D[.
following the usual linear decomposition of the hydrodynamic
forces, the governing linear equations can be expressed by the
mathematical model [11] as follows:
ðm þ A33 Þ z€ þ B33 z_ þ khys z ¼ fex33  Fpto cos q
  (3)
Ajj ; Bjj ; fex ; Fpto fðuÞ j ¼ 1; 3 ; cos qy1
x x
ðm þ A11 Þx€ þ B11 x_ ¼ fex11  Fpto ; sin qy
L L (4)


Fpto ¼ f Kpto ; Cpto ; D[; D[
The PTO coefficients are calculated in optimal mode based on
the hydrodynamic parameters of the buoy, in each wave; the buoy
hydrodynamic parametersBjj and Ajj are dependent on the buoy’s
geometry in each wave [4,16]; The subscripts 11 and 33 refer to
surge and heave motions; the wave excitation force depends on the
radiation damping coefficient of the buoy according to Haskind’s
relation in heave (valid for an axisymmetric body in deep water)
[15,18],
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2rg 3 B33
Fex33 ¼ au (5)
u3
so the effect of the buoy shape changes on its motion behavior in
each wave can be studied in the defined conditions, where au is
wave amplitude and g ¼ 9:806 m=s2 and r ¼ 1025 kg=m3 are the
gravitational acceleration and water density, respectively.
2.4. The absorber buoy
In this section, the buoy dimensions based on the frequency
characteristics of the assumed waves are obtained so that the
natural frequency of absorber buoy is approximately equal to the
middle frequency of the waves. The condition could create a reso-
nance range that will be exactly in the range of the wave
frequencies.
It should be pointed out that the wave energy converters are
3
Energy 214 (2021) 118998
commonly designed for the absorption bandwidth of a marine site
to absorb the maximum energy from the site’s predominant waves
[4]. The bandwidth is determined based on the largest frequency
range of the predominant waves in a marine site. The absorption
bandwidth (resonance bandwidth) is commonly defined as the
frequency interval in which the absorbed power is more than half of
its maximum value as in most literature [4,19].
2.4.1. Range of the buoy dimensions
Assuming a constant diameter for the cylindrical buoy, variation
of buoy draft is inevitable in designing a new geometry. A suitable
draft for the buoy can make the natural frequency of the buoy to
become closer to the incident wave frequency to create the reso-
nance in the buoy motion [3]. The main assumption in design of the
buoy is that the maximum power from the incident wave should be
captured. The heave natural frequency of the buoy can be obtained
[10,20] as follows:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 

khys þ Kpto rgSwp þ Kpto 0:5
un33 ¼ ¼ (6)
m þ A33th m þ A33th
The water-plane area of the buoy is represented by Swp. A
hemispherical buoy with diameter D and draft Lhsp ¼ D=2 was
chosen as the first geometry for the buoy, so the mass of the buoy is
equal to rðpD3 =12Þ. The theoretical coefficient of added mass of a
heaving hemisphere [21] and its natural frequency at this pre-
liminary stage (when the buoy is a freely floating body Kpto ¼ 0) are
calculated as follows:
rffiffiffiffiffiffi

 1 2g
 pD2
A33th hsp ¼ rpD3 ; ðun33 Þhsp ¼ ; Swp hsp ¼ (7)
24 D 4
It should be pointed out that in most articles in this field, the
heave natural frequency of the buoy is considered as the main
evaluation criterion due to the importance of the heave motion in
the efficiency of point-absorber WECs [12,22,23]. The natural fre-
quency of the hemispherical buoy ðun33 Þhsp, should be around the
middle range of assumed waves frequency. The lower and upper
bound of the incident wave frequency are also considered to be 0.6
and 1.6 rad/s, respectively. Therefore, the middle frequency of the
waves will be 1.1 rad/s.
Eq. (7) showed further compatibility for the 7.5 m radius of
hemispherical buoy within the range of the assumed waves. The
hemispherical geometry is the base geometry for the initial calcu-
lations as a more helpful suggestion. Thus, the geometry can consist
of other geometries such as cylindrical, spherical and conical ge-
ometries. The obtained dimensions for the hemispherical buoy
(diameter and draft) are valid only for the range of the assumed
waves. Therefore, by changing the frequency range of the incident
waves, these dimensions will be changed.
2.4.2. Description of the buoy shape
The hemispherical buoy was considered as the basic geometry.
Other new shapes for the absorber buoy should have the same
volume as the hemispherical buoy and are designed based on the
given conditions, including the same mass and water-plan area as
well as the equality in the range of the natural frequency. In addi-
tion, the symmetry of the buoy must be preserved in all designs.
The equality in the mass (m) and restoring coefficient (khys ¼
rgSwp ) for all buoys can bring their natural frequency very close to
each other. The geometries are in the form of hemisphere and cone
as well as few unusual shapes, each with a base radius of 7.5 m and
the submergence volume of 883.57 m3 that is equal to the basic
geometry volume, as can be seen in Figs. 2e4.
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Fig. 2. Three hemispherical shapes, Cylindrical-spherical-cap buoy (A), Hemispherical-cylinder buoy (B), and Hemispherical buoy (C).

Fig. 3. Three conical shapes with deadrise angle of 30
(D), 45
(E), and 60
(F).

The hemispherical buoys showed in Fig. 2 are similar to the buoy
used in Wavestar and OPT WECs where the buoy diameter of OPT
WEC is 11 m in the real design. The conical buoy illustrated in Fig. 3
(buoy-D) is also similar to the buoy utilized in IPS-buoy WEC.
In this study, the unusual buoy shapes (in Fig. 4) were designed
for better understanding of the effect of shape changes of the buoy
on its motion in the wave and also, for studying the variations of the
hydrodynamic parameters of the buoy (due to its shape change) on
the absorption efficiency.
The limitations regarding the installation, transportation, and
manufacturing costs are the major parameters for comparing
4
different buoys and/or for introducing a new alternative. However,
all the designed buoys have the same weight and thus, the raw
material will be approximately identical. Moreover, the diameter
and volume of the buoys are the same. Consequently, it can be
predicted that the manufacturing and also transportation/installa-
tion costs will be approximately identical.
2.4.3. Description of buoy design approach
The geometric design procedure of the buoy was done based on
a given methodology, which is illustrated in Fig. 5 and also
described in previous subsections. The proposed methodology
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Fig. 4. Four unusual shapes, buoy (G), buoy (H), buoy (I), and buoy (J).

Fig. 5. The design process of the absorbing buoy geometry.

designs an buoy with different shapes for optimization of the buoy
geometry within the range of the waves to capture the power of the
waves in optimal mode. In the beginning, a simple basic geometry
(sphere) was selected to determine the buoy’s diameter and draft
(D; L) that must be proportional to the frequencies of the specified
waves. Also, the buoy natural frequency must be within the range of
assumed waves frequency. Then, a new shape was designed ac-
cording to the specified diameter and volume of the base geometry
(D; c).
The natural frequency obtained for new buoy (un ) should be
within the wave frequency range and, thus, it should be checked
again. It is noteworthy that the uniform distribution of the wave
energy is assumed within the considered frequency range. In
summary, three items, including the diameter, mass and natural
frequency should be checked in three controller boxes, as illus-
trated in Fig. 5, for creating a new geometry in this approach. The
primary requirements in this algorithm are considered as follows:
 The diameter and volume (mass) must be constant for all the
buoy geometries
 The natural frequencies of the buoy must be within the wave
frequencies range; the midpoint of the predominant frequencies
is the best

5
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

3. Model analysis derivatives is continuous everywhere. The function satisfies the

Laplace’s equation. It can be interpreted as the response of a system
In order to calculate the hydrodynamic coefficients of the buoy, at a field point pðx; y; zÞ due to a delta function input at the source
a frequency-domain analysis was performed using the boundary pointq. This solution can be applied with the Green’s second the-
element method (BEM) that are well known as the effective tool in orem to derive the integral equation for the velocity potentials on
the computation of the boundary value problems associated with the surface of the body. The velocity potential is determined using
the wave-body interactions. One set is a right-handed coordinate the following discretization form of the so-called boundary integral
system, o-xyz, fixed in the fluid with o-z opposing the direction of equation (BIE) for any point on the body boundary and in the fluid
gravity and o-xy lying in the undisturbed free surface. The buoy is domain [25,26]. The associated BIE s for the radiation problem and
subjected to incoming waves of amplitude au and frequency u the wave diffraction problem, respectively [26], are:
propagating in the positive x-direction. The fluid flow is assumed to
be ideal and non-rotational. Hence, the Laplace’s equation governs v4j
vGðp; qÞ
the computational domain. Assuming the regular wave and 2p4j ðpÞ þ ∬ 4j ðqÞ dSq ¼ ∬ Gðp; qÞdSq (15)
S0 vnq S0 vn q
ignoring the surface tension effect and also, consider the buoy in
water of infinite depth, one can have the total potential function (4)
resulted from the incident wave to the buoy expressed in the form
vGðp; qÞ
of a combination of three potential terms [24,25]. The three terms 2p4A ðpÞ þ ∬ 4A ðqÞ dSq ¼ 4p40 ðpÞ (16)
include the incident wave potential 40 , the scattering potential 47 , S0 vnq
and the radiation components of the velocity potential of body
motion 4j . where v=v nq denotes the differentiation in the normal direction at
the source point qðx; h; zÞ2S0 and also, pðx; y; zÞ denotes the field
V2 4 ¼ 042U (8) point. The Green’s function G for free-space is defined [26] by

n X
6
o ð
∞
1 1 1
4ðx; y; z; tÞ ¼ Re xj 4j ðx; y; zÞ þ au 4A ðx; y; zÞ eiut ; 4A ¼ 40 Gðp ; qÞ ¼ þ þ 2nPV etðzþzÞ J0 ðtRÞdt
j¼1 r r1 t n
0
þ 47
 2pinet ðzþzÞ J0 ðnRÞ (17)
(9)
where R denotes the distance between the source and the field
igau ðnzinx cos biny sin b Þ u2 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi points that is R2 ¼ ðx  xÞ2 þ ðy  hÞ2 and also, r1 2 ¼ R2 þ
40 ¼ e ; n ¼ ; i ¼ 1 (10)
u g ðz þ zÞ2 , and r 2 ¼ R2 þ ðz  zÞ2 . The x, y, and z are the coordinates
of the flow field point and the coordinates x, h, and z for the source
where xj ; j ¼ 1; …; 6 denotes the complex amplitudes of oscilla- point [26,27]. The six components of force and moment for the
tory body displacement in its six rigid-body degrees of freedom and radiation problem in the matrix form can be obtained as:
b denotes the propagation angle of the incident waves relative to
the positive x-axis [26]. The boundary conditions of the free surface
nX
6 o v 4k
and the seabed are described, respectively, as follows: Fk ¼ Re xj eiut fkj ; k; j ¼ 1; …; 6; fkj ¼  r∬ 4j ds (18)
j¼1 S0 v n
v2 4 v4
þg ¼0 (11)
vt 2 vz where fkj is the complex force coefficient of unit amplitude in the
radiation problem of the buoy. The hydrodynamic coefficients
v4 including the added-mass (Akj ) and the radiation damping (Bkj ) can
¼0 (12)
vn
be defined as the components of the fkj force [27] as follows:fkj ¼
The Sommerfeld radiation condition at infinity boundary of the u2 Akj  iuBkj
computational domain and the boundary conditions on the wetted
The numerical methods are applied to solve the radiation
surface of the buoy (S0 ) [24,26], respectively, as follows:
problem of buoy-C with the radius of 7.5 m (rb ¼ 7:5) in the regular
  pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi waves with different frequencies. The obtained results in dimen-
v4
lim ± incosb 4 ¼ 0; i ¼ 1 (13) sionless form for added mass and damping coefficients are
x/±∞ vx
compared with the results of Hulme [27] in Fig. 6.

v47 v4
¼  0 (14) A33 B 2
vn vn mb ¼ ; l ¼ 33 ; c ¼ prb3 ; rb ¼ 7:5 (19)
rc b ruc 3
The S0 conditions for radiation problem in translational motions
and rotational motions are v4j =vn ¼ iu nj ; j ¼ 1; 2; 3 and v4j = Fig. 6 shows the effect of increasing the number of panels (el-
vn ¼ ¼ iu ðr  nÞj ; j ¼ 4; 5; 6, respectively. Here nj¼1; 2 ; 3 are the ements) from 1920 to 3456 on the decrease in calculation error. It is
Cartesian components of a unit vector on the body surface, directed observed that with increasing the number of elements in the buoy
into the body [26]. geometry, the obtained results get closer to the results of Hulme’s
research [27] and the solutions become more accurate. However,
increasing the number of panels alone cannot be considered a
3.1. Integral equations major factor for improving the results. The relative error for the
hydrodynamic coefficients of buoy-C in heave is obtained and
The potential for a unit source at qðx; h; zÞ defines the Green’s shown in Fig. 7 for the different panels. The error is calculated in
function G. The Green’s function with its first and second comparison with that of the research by Hulme [27] as follows:
6
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Fig. 6. Comparison between the dimensionless results in the present study and those of the research by Hulme [27], the added mass and damping hydrodynamic coefficients,
respectively.

Fig. 7. The relative error for the hydrodynamic coefficients of the buoy C in heave motion for 1920 to 3456 panels.

research by Yang [26] in Fig. 8, and this comparison shows a good

Relative error ¼ g ¼ correlation with that given by Yang [26].

Analytic resultsHulme½27  Numerical resultsPresent (20) ! !

0 Fex11 0 Fex33
Analytic resultsHulme½27 Fex ¼ ; Fex ¼ (21)
S
rgau rb2 Surge
H
rgau rb2 Heave
The obtained results correlate well with that given by Hulme
[27]. The six components of wave exciting force for the diffraction
problem on buoy-C are obtained in the following dimensionless
form. The results (forces) were also compared with those of the

3.2. RAOs and the natural frequencies

The hydrodynamics analysis is performed for the case in which,

the buoy is a fully floating body (an unmoored buoy) to calculate
the natural frequency and also the RAO of the buoy at this stage
(when the PTO’s coefficients are zero).
The maximum buoy oscillation occurs in the resonance condi-
tion when the natural frequency of the buoy is equal to the incident
wave frequency [15]. Hence, the maximum RAOs can show natural
frequency of the buoys and also the resonance region in different
directions. In Fig. 9, the resonance region of the buoys is shown
with double arrow line as well as the RAO of the buoys is shown for
the heave motion versus the dimensionless parameter of wave
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
frequency u*, which is defined as u* ¼ u D=g .
The phase difference between the natural frequencies of the
buoys is related to their different shape (different added-mass co-
Fig. 8. Comparison between the dimensionless results in the present study and those
efficients); however, the frequencies are within the assumed range
of the research by Yang [26], the wave exciting force on the buoy C in the diffraction of waves. So, a fair condition is established for comparing the buoys
0 ) and heave (F 0 ) motions, respectively.
problem for surge (Fex with each other. More details are reported in Table 1.
S exH

7
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Fig. 9. The heave RAO of the buoys when the buoys are freely floating (the unmoored Fig. 10. Average of hydrodynamic damping coefficients of the buoys in each wave
buoys), the resonance region. ~ pto
(C ) and their average ( C optimal ).
optimal

3.3. Optimal PTO
The optimal coefficients of the PTO system are described in Eq.
(2). Based on the equation, selecting a given damping coefficient for
the PTO system, as the optimal coefficient, is difficult because it is
sensitive to wave frequency and buoy shape. The curve in Fig. 10
range of all waves and resonance region that are defined as the
suboptimal and optimal modes for the PTO, respectively. These two
modes are defined only for better comparison of the buoys in the
paper, which are dependent on the buoy shape and wave charac-
teristics, as follows:
 
shows the average of hydrodynamic damping coefficients of the * *
~ pto If : K pto C pto ¼ ½0:2 0:021/Suboptimal mode (24)
buoys in each wave frequency (C ), which can show
optimal
somehow the optimal coefficient for the PTO damping in each
 
wave. The average of the curve, which is represented by C optimal, is * *
If : K pto C pto ¼ ½0:029 0:024/Optimal mode (25)
206.3 kN s/m within all the incident waves. This value is 237.4 kN s/
m within the resonance region.
The optimal coefficients for the PTO system are different for
various waves and buoys. However, a certain amount must be
4. Dynamics of the WEC model
selected for the PTO coefficients in order to investigate the dy-
namics of the model with different buoys. Hence, two dimension-
* *
The model is linear and the incident waves are considered to be
less parameters (K pto and C pto ), which can bring the PTO system harmonic and regular, so displacements of the buoy and compo-
closer to average optimal conditions of K optimal and C optimal , are nents of the excitation force will be simple-harmonic functions of
defined as follows: time. Therefore, both exciting force and steady-state response of
the buoy are proportional to the wave amplitude au , as follows:
* Kpto *
 h i h i
K pto ¼ ; if : K pto ¼ ½0:2 0:0290Kpto y K optimal ¼ ½355:6 51:6 fex11 fex33 ¼ au Re Fex11 eiut Fex33 eiut ; ½x z ¼ au Re Xeiut Zeiut
khys
(22) (26)
By substituting Eq. (26) into Eqs. (3) and (4), the motion of the
* Cpto 2p buoy along z- and x-directions are obtained as follows:
C pto ¼ ; Tn ¼ ; if :
khys Tn un (23) Fex33  Kpto D[  Cpto D[_
* Z¼ (27)
C pto ¼ ½0:021 0:0240Cpto y C optimal ¼ ½206:3 237:4 u2 ðm þ A33 Þ þ iuB33 þ khys

These are the values of average optimal coefficients within the

Table 1
The natural frequency of the buoys (unjj ), the maximum value of RAOs (Max).

Motion direction Heave33 Surge11

Buoy un33 (rad/s) Max RAO un11 (rad/s) Max RAO

Geometry

Hemisphere: Buoy-A y1:129 2.131 y0:972 2.055

Buoy-B y1:156 1.997 y0:973 2.446
Buoy-C y1:169 1.888 y0:974 2.868
Cone: Buoy-D (30
) y1:122 2.235 y0:973 2.241
Buoy-E (45
) y1:167 1.944 y0:972 2.102
Buoy-F (60
) y1:210 1.631 y0:85 1.909
Unusual shape: Buoy-G y1:117 2.331 y0:974 2.503
Buoy-H y1:111 2.394 y0:973 2.521
Buoy-I y1:164 1.987 y0:91 1.792
Buoy-J y1:155 2.031 y0:95 2.130

8
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Fig. 11. Computational process of the WEC dynamic model.

amplitude (D[* ¼ jD[max j=au ).

Fex11 L
X¼
u ðm þ A11 ÞL þ iu B11 L þ Kpto D[ þ Cpto D[_
2 creases when the frequency of the incident waves approaches the
The dynamics of the WEC model is calculated with the aid of a
numerical model. The flowchart of Fig. 11 shows how the model
works together as a whole and how the output power and the
absorption efficiency are calculated.
At this stage, the PTO is assumed to be in the calculated optimal
* *
and suboptimal modes (K pto C pto ). The PTO force is calculated ac-
cording to the change in the D[ parameter and its variations ve-
_ inside a computational loop and vice versa. Their
locity (D[)
amounts are converged in the loop with the iteration equal to three
times of the number of incident waves. The curves in Fig. 12 show
the value of D[* , which is a dimensionless number obtained by
dividing the maximum change in the spring length to the wave
As can be seen in Fig. 12, the change in the D[ parameter in-
(28)
natural frequency of the buoy, and then it decreases as the incident
wave frequency gets away from the buoy natural frequency. The
highest crests are related to the buoys A, D, G, and H that have
approximately the same natural frequency in heave and surge.
These buoys belong to three different geometrical groups, as seen
in Figs. 2e4.
Referring to Fig. 12, two main differences can be observed
compared to the optimal and suboptimal modes. First, about 17%
increase in the crests of D[* can be seen. Second, the position of the
crests is changed. The crests, which represent the maximum vari-
ations of PTO’s spring length, occur in the lower frequency
compared to the suboptimal mode. The results are also clearly
illustrated in Fig. 13 for better comparison.

Fig. 12. Dimensionless results: the length variation of the PTO’s spring (in the suboptimal and optimal modes).

9
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares
Fig. 13. Comparison D[* between the suboptimal and optimal modes.
According to the obtained results, a suitable geometry can bring
the WEC model to the optimal conditions without changing the
PTO specifications, as can be realized from Fig. 13. Actually, the
performance of the buoy H in the WEC model for the suboptimal
mode is approximately equal to the performance of buoy C for the
optimal mode and more than the buoy F in the optimal mode. The
shape of the buoy H was designed by a circular arc with the radius
of 11 m; the buoy F is a conical buoy with deadrise angle of 60
and
buoy C is the hemispherical buoy (the base geometry). The curve
peak of parameter D[* for the buoy H (in the suboptimal mode) and
for the buoys F and C (in the optimal mode) are 1.065, 1.011, and
1.072, respectively.
5. Absorption efficiency
The absorption efficiency of the model is defined by the
parameter h, which is non-dimensionalized by dividing the absor-
bed power to the maximum theoretical limit of power that an
axisymmetric heaving buoy can absorb from regular waves [10,11].
Pabs rg2 au 2
h¼ ; Pmax ¼ Cw
Pmax 4u
The maximum capture width was defined by Cw ¼ g=u2 for
deep-water waves [11]. The dual effective motion of the buoy (the
heave and surge motions) affect the absorbed power by the WEC
model that is
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 2
1  
Pabs ¼ u2 Cpto  x2 þ ðz þ LÞ2  L
2
According to the obtained results, buoy H has the best perfor-
mance in the power absorber process, while the buoys G, D, and A
are the next ones (as shown in Fig. 14). It can also be seen that the
performance of buoy H in suboptimal mode is higher compared to
the performance of buoy F and it is approximately equal to the
buoys C in optimal mode. The issue shows the effect of the buoy
shape on the absorbed power. The curves in Fig. 14 also show that
the performance of buoy-D (cone-cylinder) is slightly better than
buoy-A (cylindrical-spherical-cap) in the process of power
absorbing from the wave. Similarly, this subject was also
mentioned in the research by Khojasteh and Kamali [10]. They
investigated the dynamics of cone-cylinder and hemisphere-
cylinder, which are similar to buoy-D and buoy-A in the present
study, respectively. They found that the cone-cylinder buoy slightly
outperforms the hemisphere-cylinder shape. Two criteria (the
same mass and radius) were also considered in their research [10].
As mentioned, the obtained results should be compared in the
Energy 214 (2021) 118998
Fig. 14. Absorbed power; in the suboptimal mode for the buoy H and in optimal mode
for all the buoys, Influence of the shape change of the buoy on absorbed power, and the
resonance bandwidth range.
resonance bandwidth within the assumed waves range. Here, the
bandwidth is determined in the optimal conditions and in a region
between the frequency of 0.65 and 1.06 rad/s
(0:803  u*n55  1:310) that covers all the buoys as shown in Fig. 14
with double arrow line. For better comparison of the buoys per-
formance with the same geometric groups (hemisphere, cone, and
unusual shapes) on the efficiency of WEC model, the results are
separated for each group.
The efficiency curves of the model show that the performance of
the buoy A in the energy absorption process is better compared to
the two buoys of B and C. The difference between the curves for
buoys A and B and also the buoys A and C are about 12.8% (A-B) and
14.3% (A-C) in peak and are about 8.4% (A-B), 10.5% (A-C) on
average, respectively. No significant difference is observed between
the performance of buoys B and C. Also, the intersection of the two
curves can be due to the difference in their efficiency peak points.
According to the provided results in Fig. 16, approximately the
same difference rate between the efficiency curves of the model
with the conical buoys was observed. Also, the performance
(29)
appraisal of the buoys shows the superiority of the conical buoy
with deadrise angle of 30
(D) compared to two conical buoys with
deadrise angle of 45
(E) and 60
(F), respectively. There are three
different peak values for the efficiency of WEC model in u* y1.15,
1.175, and 1.2 for the conical buoys of D, E, and F, respectively. In the
case study, the efficiency of the conical buoy-D (with the angle of
30
) relative to the buoy-E (45
) and buoy-F (60
) is more than 8.7%
(30) and 22% on average and is 12.3% and 28.1% at most, respectively.
The curves in Fig. 17 show that the buoys H and G have the same
performance and they have the best performance in energy ab-
sorption process compared to the all designed buoys.
Based on the results obtained above (Figs. 12e17), it is apparent
that the buoy shape has a significant effect on the absorbed power
so that a buoy in PTO’s non-optimal mode can absorb the same
energy as another one in the PTO optimal condition. The issue has
special importance in the design process of the PTO system of every
WEC devices. The efficiency of the model can change considerably
by replacing a suitable buoy. The maximum difference between the
efficiencies of the model is about 28%. The average difference is
about 13% in optimal mode within the resonance bandwidth.
Actually, Figs. 9e17 shows the effect of the shape change of the
buoy on the natural frequency, PTO’s optimal coefficients, absorbed
power, and the absorption efficiency of the WEC model, while the
initial mass and radius of the buoy are kept constant in the shape
change.
10
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares
Fig. 15. Efficiency of the model with the buoys of the hemispherical geometrical group (in the range of resonance bandwidth and for the PTO optimal mode).
Fig. 16. Efficiency of the model with the buoys of the conical geometrical group as Fig. 3 (the effect of the shape change of the buoy on the absorption efficiency, while the buoy
mass and radius are constant).
6. Parametric sensitivity
The effective parameters on the dynamics and efficiency of the
model are the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic parameters of the
buoys, the buoy’s mass, and the PTO’s coefficients in each wave. The
designed buoys have the same mass and hydrostatic restoring
coefficient. Also, the PTO coefficients were selected in the optimal
mode. Hence, the effect of the hydrodynamic parameters of the
buoys on the model’s efficiency must be investigated, which are the
added-mass and radiation damping coefficients. Actually, the
absorbed power is dependent on these two parameters in the
present modeling.
As can be seen in Fig. 18, by increasing the heave damping
parameter of the buoy (B* ¼ B33 ), the absorbed power (Pabs ) is
decreased in each incident wave. Therefore, the direct effect of
heave hydrodynamic damping parameter of the buoy on the
captured power, regardless of incident wave specifications can be
concluded. The analysis of the results related to the added mass
coefficients of the buoy in heave and comparing them with the
11
Energy 214 (2021) 118998
absorbed power shows a similar consequence, as seen in Fig. 19, but
in reverse mode. According to these graphs, increasing the hydro-
dynamic added mass of the buoy, the absorbed power increases
regardless of wave frequency.
In order to study the effect of the added mass and damping
coefficients simultaneously, a dimensionless parameter is intro-
duced as AB* ¼ A33 =ðB33 Tu Þ. According to the results in Fig. 20, the
buoy with the lower AB* coefficient absorbs the lower power and
vice versa. Increasing the parameter AB*, the absorbed power in-
creases in each wave. The results also show the direct effect of
parameter AB* on the power extracted by the WEC model regard-
less of wave frequency.
The impact of the radiation damping and added-mass co-
efficients (in the surge motion) on the extracted power differs in
each wave, as can be observed in the graphs of Figs. 21 and 22.
Therefore, it cannot be inferred that the relationship between the
surge hydrodynamic coefficients and the absorbed power is inde-
pendent of the wave characteristic in the surge motion.
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Fig. 17. Efficiency of the model with the buoys of the unusual geometrical group as Fig. 4 (the effect of the shape change of the buoy on the absorption efficiency, while the buoy
mass and radius are constant).

Fig. 18. Comparison between three parametersPabs B* , andu* in each wave and within the resonance bandwidth in heave motion.

Fig. 19. Absorbed power (Pabs ) versus the added-mass coefficient of the buoy (A33 ) in each wave for heave motion.

12
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares Energy 214 (2021) 118998

Fig. 20. Comparison between the value of absorbed power (Pabs ) and parameter AB* in each wave u in heave.

Fig. 21. Comparison between the Pabs and hydrodynamic damping coefficient of the buoy, B11 , in surge motion.

Fig. 22. Absorbed power (z-axis) versus the variations of added mass of the buoyA11 (y-axis) in each wave u in surge.

13
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares
7. Model analysis in irregular waves
To study the influence of buoy’s shape on the absorption effi-
ciency of energy in irregular waves, we considered three buoys
from three different geometry groups. The buoys consist of buoy-C
(group of hemispheres), buoy-F (group of cones), and buoy-H
(Unusual geometrical group), as shown in Figs. 2e4, respectively.
As a good approximation, the realistic wave conditions can be
considered by applying linear wave superposition and by defining a
spectrum such as the JONSWAP or Pierson-Moskowitz spectra.
Since the WEC model (Fig. 1) is axisymmetric and insensitive to
wave direction, it is reasonable to assume that the spectrum is one-
dimensional. The Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum is considered
where the distribution of the spectrum defined by Goda [28] is
expressed as follows:
The numerical results, which showed the time series of heave z
Sz ðuÞ ¼ 263 Hs2 Te4 u5 exp  1054Te4 u4
This is known as the spectral density function or simply fre-
quency spectrum that has the units of m2/s. The significant wave
height and the energy period are Hs and Te , respectively. In the
dimensionless form, the absorption efficiency of the model can be
written as h irr ¼ Pabs irr =Pmax irr for the irregular waves, where
ð
∞
Pabsirr ðHs ; Te Þ ¼ 2 P1 ðuÞSz udðuÞ
0 buoy-C and buoy-F. As buoy-H had the best shape for absorbing the
ð
∞ regular wave energy in the described conditions. The difference in
3
Pmaxirr ¼ 0:5g r u3
Sz ðuÞdðuÞ
0
The parameter Pmax irr is the maximum power that an axisym-
metric heaving buoy can extract in the marine state, which is
represented by the spectral distribution Sz ðuÞ[11]. The parameter
Pabs irr is the power absorbed by the buoy from regular waves of
frequency u and unit amplitude. For time-series calculations, the
spectral distribution (Eq. (31)) can be discretized as the sum of
regular waves of frequency um ¼ u0 þ n Du. The parameter u0 is
the lowest frequency considered, which is set to 0.1 rad/s, and the
parameter Du is a small frequency interval, which is considered as
0.01 rad/s n ¼ 0; 1; 2; …; N  1 where N is a large number and it is
Fig. 23. Time series of heave (z) displacement for buoy-H, buoy-C, and buoy-F, irregular waves of Hs ¼ 4 m and Te ¼ 10 s in the PTO optimal mode.
Energy 214 (2021) 118998
equal to 200. The amplitude of the wave component for order n is
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Am irr ¼ 2Sz ðuÞDu and the excitation force can be written as:
Xh
N1 i X
N1 h
 i
fexjj ðtÞ ¼ fexjj ðtÞ ¼ Am irr Re Fexjj n ðum Þeiðum tþqm Þ ; j ¼ 1; 3
n n n
(33)
The phase qm was chosen as a random real number (0 < qm < 2p).
The type of incident wave or excitation force is the difference in the
analysis conditions between this section and the previous sections.
These three buoys have the same radius, mass, natural frequency,
and restoring coefficient (water-plane area), but they have different
shapes. Hence, the analysis of buoys can show the influence of buoy
shape changes on the efficiency of the WEC model in the irregular
wave conditions.
(31) and surge x displacements of the buoy-H, C, and F, are illustrated in
Fig. 23 for the irregular waves of Hs ¼ 4 m and Te ¼ 10 s and in the
optimal mode of the PTO system. The curves (in Figs. 23 and 24)
show the wave grouping effects on the heave motion of the buoys
and on the efficiency of WEC model, respectively. It should be noted
that the figure used is for the illustration purposes and represents
the solution in the given value of the significant wave height and
energy period (Hs ; Te ).
The model analysis in irregular waves shows that buoy-H has
the best performance in the power absorption process compared to
(32)
phase between the displacement and efficiency curves (Figs. 23 and
24) can only be seen more than that in the previous analysis of the
model in the regular waves.
8. Conclusions
The present study focused on the effect of buoy shape and its
derivatives (shape-induced hydrodynamic coefficients of buoy) on
the absorption efficiency in a single-body WEC model. To this end,
various buoys with the same overall properties, but different
shapes were designed for a single-body WEC model. The model,
which was equipped with each of the buoys, was analyzed in heave
and surge motions under the deep-water wave excitation.
14
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares
Fig. 24. Time series of absorption efficiency of model with buoy-H, buoy-C, and buoy-F (h irr ), irregular waves described in Fig. 23.
In order to create identical conditions for comparing the model
with different buoys with each other, an algorithm was developed
to design the buoy geometry based on the characteristics of the
incident waves, so that the designed buoys have the same radius,
mass, and natural frequency. Moreover, the specifications of the
PTO system were defined based on the range of the assumed wave
frequencies, the natural frequency of buoys, and hydrostatic and
hydrodynamic characteristics of the designed buoys so that the PTO
system could fall within the optimal or suboptimal performance
mode. Furthermore, the absorption bandwidth was also obtained
based on the performance of buoys and the incident wave fre-
quencies, as the bandwidth was defined as a frequency interval in
which the power absorbed by the buoy was more than half of its
maximum value in the assumed waves range. These mentioned
requirements can create the same and fair conditions for
comparing various buoys with each other and subsequently, for
investigating the influence of buoy shape on the absorption
efficiency.
The obtained results in the case study, which are only valid for
small-amplitude waves regardless of the nonlinear effects, show
that with changing the full hemispherical shape into the spherical-
cap shape for the buoy, the efficiency increases about 10% on
average in the assumed wave range, as seen in Fig. 15. Moreover, the
decrease in the deadrise angle in the conical buoys can increase the
absorbed power, as seen in Fig. 16. Besides, the buoy’s hydrody-
namic coefficients (geometry-induced coefficients) affect the PTO
optimal coefficients, as explained in Eq. (2). Therefore, one can
conclude that an appropriate geometry for the buoy can increase
the efficiency of the WEC without changing the PTO specifications
and/or can improve the performance of the PTO system to obtain
optimal power absorption.
By simultaneously analyzing the hydrodynamic coefficients of
the buoy and the absorption efficiency, one can conclude that two
parametersAB* and B* , which are the derivatives of the added-mass
and damping coefficients of the buoy, can be considered the
appropriate criteria for choosing the suitable geometry of the buoy,
regardless of the incident wave frequency. Moreover, the heave
hydrodynamic coefficients of the buoy have a more effective and
direct influence on increasing the absorbed power than the surge
motion. Furthermore, when the heave radiation damping of the
buoy is reduced (through the buoy shape change), the power
15
Energy 214 (2021) 118998
absorbed by the WEC model is increased regardless of the incident
wave frequency. This means that a shape with the capability of
decreasing the heave radiation damping coefficient of the buoy can
better improve the absorption efficiency in each wave. Another
important point is that the geometries with the higher AB* can
absorb higher power compared to the buoys with the lower
amount of AB* , regardless of the incident wave frequency.
The investigation into the nonlinear effects and testing the
buoys remain important issues, which should be addressed in
future works. According to the model illustrated in Fig. 1, two
nonlinear effects of the wave-buoy interaction (i.e., viscous effects
and variations of buoy’s wetted surface) seem to be the most
important nonlinear effects in this study case. There are different
versions of potential flow models, including partly-nonlinear,
weakly-nonlinear, and fully-nonlinear methods, which can be
used to calculate these nonlinear effects and can be suggested for
future studies.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] Viet N, Xie X, Liew K, Banthia N, Wang Q. Energy harvesting from ocean waves
by a floating energy harvester. Energy 2016;112:1219e26.
[2] Pietra L, Tello M, Bhattacharjee J, Soares CG. Review and classification of wave
energy converters, vol. 10. Lisboa, Portugal: Centre for Marine Technology and
Engineering (CENTEC), Instituto Superior Te
cnico; 2012.
[3] Chen Z, Zhou B, Zhang L, Sun L, Zhang X. Performance evaluation of a dual
resonance wave-energy convertor in irregular waves. Appl Ocean Res
2018;77:78e88.
[4] Shadman M, Estefen SF, Rodriguez CA, Nogueira IC. A geometrical optimiza-
tion method applied to a heaving point absorber wave energy converter.
Renew Energy 2018;115:533e46.
[5] Li X, Liang C, Chen C-A, Xiong Q, Parker RG, Zuo L. Optimum power analysis of
a self-reactive wave energy point absorber with mechanically-driven power
take-offs. Energy 2020;195:116927.
[6] Beirao PJBFN, Malça CMdSP. Design and analysis of buoy geometries for a
wave energy converter. International Journal of Energy and Environmental
Engineering 2014;5:91.
[7] Pastor J, Liu Y. Frequency and time domain modeling and power output for a
heaving point absorber wave energy converter. International Journal of
M.N. Berenjkoob, M. Ghiasi and C.Guedes Soares
Energy and Environmental Engineering 2014;5:101.
[8] De Backer G, Vantorre M, Frigaard P, Beels C, De Rouck J. Bottom slamming on
heaving point absorber wave energy devices. J Mar Sci Technol 2010;15:
119e30.
[9] Amiri A, Panahi R, Radfar S. Parametric study of two-body floating-point wave
absorber. J Mar Sci Appl 2016;15:41e9.
[10] Khojasteh D, Kamali R. Evaluation of wave energy absorption by heaving point
absorbers at various hot spots in Iran seas. Energy 2016;109:629e40.
[11] Vicente PC, Falca~o AF, Justino PA. Nonlinear dynamics of a tightly moored
point-absorber wave energy converter. Ocean Eng 2013;59:20e36.
[12] Jin P, Zhou B, Go€ teman M, Chen Z, Zhang L. Performance optimization of a
coaxial-cylinder wave energy converter. Energy 2019;174:450e9.
[13] Giorgi G, Ringwood JV. Computationally efficient nonlinear FroudeeKrylov
force calculations for heaving axisymmetric wave energy point absorbers.
Journal of Ocean Engineering and Marine Energy 2017;3:21e33.
[14] Lo
pez M, Taveira-Pinto F, Rosa-Santos P. Numerical modelling of the CECO
wave energy converter. Renew Energy 2017;113:202e10.
[15] Nazari Berenjkoob M, Ghiasi M, Guedes Soares C. On the improved design of
the buoy geometry on a two-body wave energy converter model. J Renew
Sustain Energy 2019;11:054702.
[16] Lopez-Pavon C, Souto-Iglesias A. Hydrodynamic coefficients and pressure
loads on heave plates for semi-submersible floating offshore wind turbines: a
comparative analysis using large scale models. Renew Energy 2015;81:
864e81.
[17] Garcia-Teruel A, Forehand D. Optimal wave energy converter geometry for
different modes of motion. In: Advances in renewable energies offshore:
proceedings of the 3rd international conference on renewable energies
offshore. Lisbon, Portugal: CRC Press; 2018. p. 299 (RENEW 2018), October 8-
16
Energy 214 (2021) 118998
10, 2018.
[18] Newman JN. Marine hydrodynamics. MIT press; 2018.
[19] Veigas M, Lo
pez M, Iglesias G. Assessing the optimal location for a shoreline
wave energy converter. Appl Energy 2014;132:404e11.
[20] Joe H, Roh H, Cho H, Yu S-C. Development of a flap-type mooring-less wave
energy harvesting system for sensor buoy. Energy 2017;133:851e63.
[21] Korotkin AI. General discussion of body motion in an ideal infinite fluid. In:
Added masses of ship structures. Springer; 2009. p. 1e20.
[22] Piscopo V, Benassai G, Cozzolino L, Della Morte R, Scamardella A. A new
optimization procedure of heaving point absorber hydrodynamic perfor-
mances. Ocean Eng 2016;116:242e59.
[23] Vantorre M, Banasiak R, Verhoeven R. Modelling of hydraulic performance
and wave energy extraction by a point absorber in heave. Appl Ocean Res
2004;26:61e72.
[24] Wang K, Zhang X, Gao X. Study on scattering wave force of horizontal and
vertical plate type breakwaters. China Ocean Eng 2011;25:699e708.
[25] Mehdi Nazari Berenjkoob MG. A numerical and theoretical study of wave
interaction with floating vertical cylinders by boundary element method and
removal of singularities in boundary integral equations. The 18th Marine
Industries Conference (MIC2016) 2017:18e21. Octoberber 2016 e Kish Island.
[26] Yang S-A. On the singularities of Green’s formula and its normal derivative,
with an application to surface-waveebody interaction problems. Int J Numer
Methods Eng 2000;47:1841e64.
[27] Hulme A. The wave forces acting on a floating hemisphere undergoing forced
periodic oscillations. J Fluid Mech 1982;121:443e63.
[28] Goda Y. Random seas and design of maritime structures. World scientific;
2010.