Presentazione standard di PowerPoint - GNRAC · 2017-02-09 · Pelamis Oyster Wave dragon WAVE...
Transcript of Presentazione standard di PowerPoint - GNRAC · 2017-02-09 · Pelamis Oyster Wave dragon WAVE...
GNRAC Gruppo Nazionale per la Ricerca sull'Ambiente CostieroSessione sullo sfruttamento delle energie rinnovabili marine
Ferrara, 23/9/2016
Fattibilità di estrazione di energia da onda e dimensionamento di un convertitore point absorber nel Mar Mediterraneo
Renata Archetti
Adrià Moreno Miquel
Alessandro Antonini
DICAM, Università di Bologna
Giuseppe Passoni
Giambattista Gruosso
Silvia Bozzi
DEIB; Politecnico di Milano
Wave energy potential off the Italian coasts:
Sea of Sardinia12 kW/m
Strait of Sicily7 kW/m
Wave energy potential
of the Mediterranean
basin
30 GW
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: THE RESOURCE
Liberti et al., 2013
PELAMIS AQUABUOY WAVE DRAGON
WAVEBOB
SEABASEDCETO
OYSTER
WAVESTAR
Dunnett and Wallace, 2009
Babarit et al., 2012
Babarit et al., 2012 Bozzi et al., 2013
Producer Dunnett and Wallace, 2009
Babarit et al., 2012
Silva et al., 2013
Alghero
Mazara del Vallo
Bozzi et al., 2013
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: A FEASIBILITY STUDY
PTOPelamis
WavebobWavestar
Hydraulic motor
AquaBuOYWave dragon
OysterCETO
Hydraulic turbine
Seabased
Linear generator
Location Offshore Nearshore
AquaBuOYPelamis
Wave dragonWavebobSeabased
OysterCETO
Wavestar
Working principle
Heave Pitch
Overtopping
AquaBuOYPelamis
WavebobSeabased
CETOWavestar
Oyster
Wave dragon
Size
Point absorber
Attenuator
Terminator
AquaBuOYWavebobSeabased
CETOWavestar
Pelamis
OysterWave dragon
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: A FEASIBILITY STUDY
Bozzi S, Archetti R, Passoni G. Wave electricity production in Italian offshore: A preliminary investigation. Renewable Energy 2014 (62), 407 – 416
Alghero Mazara
AquaBuOY Pelamis Wave Dragon AquaBuOY Pelamis Wave Dragon
Rated power[kW] 250 750 7000 250 750 7000
Mean power [kW] 22 71 616 9 32 270
Annual energy production[MWh] 192 619 5400 81 278 2362
Capacity factor [%] 8.7% 9.4% 8.8% 3.7% 4.2% 3.9%
Mazara
Alghero
Pelamis
Wave Dragon
AquaBuOY
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: A FEASIBILITY STUDY
Resizing … to tailor the devices for the Italian wave climate
TP l0.5P l3.5HS l
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: A FEASIBILITY STUDY
Oyster
Pelamis
Wavedragon
Wavebob
Aquabuoy
Seabased
Wavestar
CETO0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0
Capacityfactor
Scale
Mazara del Vallo
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0
Capacityfactor
Scale
Alghero
16%
20%17% 17% 16%
33%
7%
12%
18%
22%19% 18%
16%
34%
8%
13%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
AquaBuOY Pelamis Wave dragon Wavebob Seabased Oyster CETO Wavestar
Capacityfactor Alghero
Mazara del Vallo
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: A FEASIBILITY STUDY
PosizioneAL LARGO
TipologiaPOINT ABSORBER
Principio di lavoroSUSSULTO (HEAVE)
Sistema di conversione dell’energiaGENERATORE ELETTRICO LINEARE
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: A FEASIBILITY STUDY
• Linear wave theory• Regular waves• 1D approximation• Heave motion
ASSUMPTIONS
NUMERICAL MODEL
HYDRODYNAMIC FORCES
MECHANICAL FORCE
𝑚 ∙ ሷ𝑧 = 𝐹𝑒𝑥𝑐 𝑡 + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑 𝑡, ሶ𝑧, ሷ𝑧 + 𝐹𝐻 𝑡, 𝑧 + 𝐹𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑔 𝑡, ሶ𝑧 + 𝐹𝐺𝐸𝑁(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧, 𝑖) + 𝐹𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔(𝑡, 𝑧)Equationof motion
Electromagnetic model𝑒𝑚𝑓𝑝ℎ(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) = 𝑅𝑡 ∙ 𝑖𝑝ℎ(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) + 𝐿 ∙𝑑𝑖𝑝ℎ𝑑𝑡
ELECTROMAGNETIC FORCE
SINGLE-BODY HEAVING POINT ABSORBER
Bozzi S., Miquel A.M., Antonini A., Passoni G., Archetti R. Modeling of a point absorber for energy conversion in Italian seas. Energies 2013 (6)
WindingsSlider
Stator
Sviluppo del modello accoppiato idrodinamico ed elettromagnetico
Confronto modello 1DoF e 2DoF: effetto del surge
Ottimizzazione della coppiaboa-generatore per i mari italiani
Incremento efficienza: aggiunta di un corpo supplementare risonante
Interazione idrodinamica tra dispositivi: simulazione di un array
Equazione del moto
Equazione elettromagnetica
WAVE ENERGY IN ITALY: A FEASIBILITY STUDY
Electricity production
Capacity factor
Efficiency
RESULTS:
displacements,
electric power
588 589 590 591 592 593 594-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
time [s]
Buoy z[m
], v[m
/s], w
ave[m
]
Buoy position (r) and sea level (b) over time for wave height H= 1.2374 and period T= 5.94
z
u
eta
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
t/T [-]
P(t) [kW
]
GENERATED POWER for H=1.24 [m] and T=5.94 [s]
A
B
C
Ptot
Pm
Occurrences
Power
matrix
Hydrodynamic
coefficients
(BEM solver)Radiation stress
Excitation force
WavesHydro-mechanic
model
Electromagnetic
model
WAVE ENERGY CONVERSION MODELLING
Generator
parameters
(FEM solver)
Magnet’s flux linkage
Inductances
Occurrences [%] Energy [MWh/m]
0.25 𝑚 ≤ 𝐻𝑠 ≤ 5 𝑚
2 𝑠 ≤ 𝑇𝑝 ≤ 12 𝑠
Simulated sea states
Wave climate characterization
National wave metric network
8 Italian locations
APPLICATION TO ITALIAN SEAS
D = 3 mD = 2 m D = 4 m D = 5 m D = 6 m
4 kW 6 kW 8 kW 10 kW 12 kW
Antonini A., Miquel A.M., Archetti R., Bozzi S., Passoni G. Preliminary design of a point absorber with linear generator designed for energy production off the Italian coasts. EWTECH 2013Scarpa F. Wave energy in Italian seas: Hydro-Electric modeling of a point absorber with a directly driven tubular linear generator. M.Sc. Thesis 2013
2. Scelta dei parametri geometrici del cilindro
1. Scelta della forma ottimale del galleggiante
Analisi di sensitività della potenza prodotta ai parametri geometrici del cilindro (diametro, altezza, affondamento)
3. Simulazione di boe cilindriche di diverso diametro con lo stesso affondamento
4. Simulazione di generatori di diversa potenza nominale, con la stessa unità elementare
APPLICATION TO ITALIAN SEAS
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
3 4 5 6 7
CF
[%
]
Buoy diameter [m]
𝐴𝐸𝑂 =
ℎ𝑘
𝑀𝑃ℎ𝑘𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑟ℎ𝑘 [𝑀𝑊ℎ]
𝐶𝐹 =Τ𝐴𝐸𝑂 8760
𝑁𝑃[%]
𝐶𝑊𝑅 =Τ𝐴𝐸𝑂 8760
𝐽 𝐷[%]
Target parameters ANNUAL ENERGY OUTPUT (AEO) - Mazara
CAPACITY FACTOR (CF) - MazaraEFFICIENCY (CWR) - Mazara
LG 6 kW
LG 10 kW
LG 15 kW
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
3 4 5 6 7
AE
O [
MW
h]
Buoy diameter [m]
LG 6 kW
LG 10 kW
LG 15 kW
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
3 4 5 6 7
CW
R [
%]
Buoy diameter [m]
LG 6 kW
LG 10 kW
LG 15 kW
APPLICATION TO ITALIAN SEAS
Periodo propriodel dispositivo
𝜔 0 =
𝜌𝑔𝜋𝐷2
4 + 𝐾
𝑚+𝑚𝑎
𝑇0 ≅ 2.5𝑠
Occorrenze [%]
Alghero Mazara del Vallo
CORPO SUPPLEMENTARE RISONANTENEUTROSFERICO
A PROFONDITA ELEVATA
𝜔 0 =
𝜌𝑔𝜋𝐷2
4 + 𝐾
𝑚 +𝑚𝑎
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Alghero Mazara delVallo
Ponza La Spezia
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Alghero Mazara delVallo
Ponza La Spezia
APPLICATION TO ITALIAN SEAS
Miquel A.M., Antonini A., Archetti R., Bozzi S., Passoni G. Assessment of the surge effects in a heaving point absorber in the Mediterranean Sea. OMAE 2014.
Abbrivio (surge)
Sussulto (heave)
SURGE EFFECTS
WAVE FARM MODEL
Assumptions:
Linear wave theory
Regular waves
Heave motion
Power take-off system:
Permanent magnet linear
electric generator
(10 kW)
𝑒𝑚𝑓𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) = 𝑅𝑡𝑖𝐴 𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧 + 𝐿𝑎𝑎𝑑𝑖𝐴
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝑎𝑏
𝑑𝑖𝐵
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝑎𝑐
𝑑𝑖𝐶
𝑑𝑡
𝑒𝑚𝑓𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) = 𝑅𝑡𝑖𝐵 𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧 + 𝐿𝑏𝑎𝑑𝑖𝐴
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝑏𝑏
𝑑𝑖𝐵
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝑏𝑐
𝑑𝑖𝐶
𝑑𝑡
𝑒𝑚𝑓𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) = 𝑅𝑡𝑖𝐶 𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧 + 𝐿𝑐𝑎𝑑𝑖𝐴
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝑐𝑏
𝑑𝑖𝐵
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝑐𝑐
𝑑𝑖𝐶
𝑑𝑡
𝑀1 ∙ ሷ𝑧1= 𝐹𝑒𝑥𝑐1(𝑡) + 𝐹𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑔1(𝑡, ሶ𝑧1, ሶ𝜂1) + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑11(𝑡, ሶ𝑧1, ሷ𝑧1) + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑21(𝑡, ሶ𝑧2, ሷ𝑧2) + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑31(𝑡, ሶ𝑧3, ሷ𝑧3)
+ 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑41(𝑡, ሶ𝑧4, ሷ𝑧4) + 𝐹𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑡1(𝑡, 𝑧1) + 𝐹𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔1(𝑡, 𝑧1) + 𝑭𝒈𝒆𝒏𝟏(𝒕, 𝒛𝟏, ሶ𝒛𝟏, 𝒊)
1 432
COUPLING
𝑀1 0 0 00 𝑀2 0 00 0 𝑀3 00 0 0 𝑀4
ሷ𝑧1ሷ𝑧2ሷ𝑧3ሷ𝑧4
=
𝐹𝑡1𝐹𝑡2𝐹𝑡3𝐹𝑡4
𝐹𝑔𝑒𝑛 =
𝐴,𝐵,𝐶
𝑒𝑚𝑓 ∙ 𝑖
𝜂 ሶ𝑧
Equation
of
motion
Electromagnetic model
WAVE FARM DESIGN IN THE ITALIAN OFFSHORE
8%
3%
2%
2%
11%
15%
20%
39%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%0°
45°
90°
135°
180°
225°
270°
315°
Alghero
3%2%
3%
20%12%
8%
39%
13%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%0°
45°
90°
135°
180°
225°
270°
315°
Mazara del Vallo
3%
4%
12%
10%12%
18%
32%
9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%0°
45°
90°
135°
180°
225°
270°
315°
Which are the best wave farm designs (geometric layout, WEC distance
and geographical orientation) for the Italian seas?
Ponza
7%
4%
3%
7%
16%
41%
15%
6%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%0°
45°
90°
135°
180°
225°
270°
315°
La Spezia
WEC distances
5 D
10 D
20 D
30 D
Linear layout Square layout
WAVE FARM DESIGN IN THE ITALIAN OFFSHORE: RESULTS
69
70
71
72
73
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]65
66
67
68
69
70
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]40
41
42
43
44
45
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]
Alghero Mazara del Vallo
Ponza La Spezia
AEO[MWh] AEO [MWh]
AEO [MWh] AEO [MWh]
68
69
70
71
72
73
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]65
66
67
68
69
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]
52
53
54
55
56
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]40
41
42
43
44
5 10 15 20 25 30
d/D [-]
Alghero Mazara del Vallo
Ponza La Spezia
ALGHERO MAZARA del VALLO
PONZA LA SPEZIA
d = 10 D d = 20 D
d = 20 D d = 5 D
d = 20 D d = 20 D
d = 20 D
+ 1.5 %
d = 20 D
+ 1.3 % + 2.6 % + 0.9 %
+ 2.5 % + 0.5 % + 2.4 % + 1.1 %
WAVE FARM DESIGN IN THE ITALIAN OFFSHORE: RESULTS
Future activities
Conceptual design of a point absorberBasin experiments
DISCUSSION
SPEEDAM 2016Analysis of interaction of point absorbers ‘arrays for sea wave electrical energy generation in Italian seas
IECON 2016Spatial interactions among oscillating wave energy converters: electricity production and power quality issues
IDRA 2016Design of point absorber arrays in the Italian offshore
ICIT 2015Sea wave generation: generator arrays combined with VOC converter for efficient energy conversion in Italian seas
ENEA 2014Designing a point-absorber wave energy converter for the Mediterranean Sea
Renewable energy 2014Wave electricity production in Italian offshore: a preliminary investigation
OMAE 2014Assessment of the surge effects in a heaving point absorber in the Mediterranean Sea
SPEEDAM 2014Dynamic model, parameter extraction, and analysis of two topologies of a tubular linear generator for sea wave energy production
IDRA 2014Studio delle interazioni tra convertitori di energia da onda: indicazioni preliminari per la dislocazione di parchi nei mari italiani
AIOM 2013Tecnologie esistenti per la conversione di energia nei mari italiani: uno studio di fattibilità
Energies 2013Modeling of a point absorber for energy conversion in Italian seas
EWTEC 2013Hydrodynamic modelling of a linear generator point absorber specifically designed for energy production off the Italian coasts
ICCEP 2013Wave energy production in Italian offshore: preliminar design of a point absorber with linear generator
OWEMES 2012Wave energy exploitation in Italian seas: a feasibility study
IDRA 2012Electricity generation from wave power in the Tyrrhenian Sea
OMAE 2011Feasibility study of a wave energy farm in the Mediterranean sea: comparison among different technologies
PUBLICATIONS
Renata Archetti
Adrià Moreno Miquel
DICAM
Università di Bologna
Giuseppe Passoni
Giambattista Gruosso
Silvia Bozzi
Francesca Scarpa
Federica Bizzozero
DEIB
Politecnico di Milano
Thank you
Marianna Giassi
Uppsala University
Alessandro Antonini
School of Marine Science and Engineering
Il dispositivo , opportunamente dimensionato fornisce prestazioni comparabili a quelle dei prototipi attualmente disponibili
Acquisizione know how e disponibilità di strumenti modellistici per lo studio preliminare/di fattibilità di nuovi dispositivi puntuali
Energia dal mareLe nuove tecnologie per i mari italiani
ENEA, 1-2 luglio 2014
1
2
Electromagnetic model
Assumptions:
𝑒𝑚𝑓𝐴(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) = 𝑅𝑡𝑖𝐴 (𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) + 𝐿𝐴𝐴𝑑𝑖𝐴
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝐴𝐵
𝑑𝑖𝐵
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝐴𝐶
𝑑𝑖𝐶
𝑑𝑡
𝑒𝑚𝑓𝐵(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) = 𝑅𝑡𝑖𝐵 (𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) + 𝐿𝐵𝐴𝑑𝑖𝐴
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝐵𝐵
𝑑𝑖𝐵
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝐵𝐶
𝑑𝑖𝐶
𝑑𝑡
𝑒𝑚𝑓𝐶(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) = 𝑅𝑡𝑖𝐶 (𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧) + 𝐿𝐶𝐴𝑑𝑖𝐴
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝐶𝐵
𝑑𝑖𝐵
𝑑𝑡+ 𝐿𝐶𝐶
𝑑𝑖𝐶
𝑑𝑡
Coupling
𝑀1 ሷ𝑧1 = 𝐹𝑒𝑥𝑐1(𝑡) + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑11(𝑡, ሶ𝑧1, ሷ𝑧1) + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑12(𝑡, ሶ𝑧2, ሷ𝑧2) +
+𝐹𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑔1(𝑡, ሶ𝑧1, ሶ𝜂) + 𝐹𝐻1(𝑡, 𝑧1) + 𝐹𝑔𝑒𝑛1(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧, 𝑖)
𝑀2 ሷ𝑧2 = 𝐹𝑒𝑥𝑐2(𝑡) + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑21(𝑡, ሶ𝑧1, ሷ𝑧1) + 𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑22(𝑡, ሶ𝑧2, ሷ𝑧2) +
+𝐹𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑔2(𝑡, ሶ𝑧2, ሶ𝜂) + 𝐹𝐻2(𝑡, 𝑧2) + 𝐹𝑚𝑜𝑜𝑟2(𝑡, 𝑧2) + 𝐹𝑔𝑒𝑛2(𝑡, 𝑧, ሶ𝑧, 𝑖)
𝑭𝒈𝒆𝒏 =
𝑨,𝑩,𝑪
𝒆𝒎𝒇 ∙ 𝒊
ሶ𝒛
• Regular waves • Heave motion
DUAL-BODY HEAVING POINT ABSORBER
Equation of motion
• Linear wave theory
MODELLO IDRODINAMICO – FORZE ATTIVE
31
CARICHI DOVUTI ALL’ ONDA INCIDENTE
(Ipotesi di linearità)
PRINCIPIO DI SOVRAPPOSIZIONE EFFETTI
FORZA DI ECCITAZIONE
FORZA DI RADIAZIONE
FORZA DI GALLEGGIAMENTO
FORZA DI INERZIA
𝐹𝑀𝑎𝑑𝑑(𝜔, 𝑡) = −𝑀𝑎𝑑𝑑(𝜔) ∙ ሷ𝑧(𝑡)
𝐹𝑒𝑥𝑐(𝜔, 𝑡) =𝐻
2∙ 𝐶𝑒𝑥𝑐.𝑚𝑜𝑑 ∙ cos(𝜔𝑡 + 𝐶𝑒𝑥𝑐.𝑝ℎ)
𝐹𝑟𝑎𝑑(𝜔, 𝑡) = −𝐶𝑟𝑎𝑑(𝑤) ∙ ሶ𝑧(𝑡)
𝐹𝑖𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑠 𝑧 = 𝜌𝑔 ∙ 𝑆 ∙ 𝑧
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Mad
d [k
g]
w [rad/s]
Added mass
Madd
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Cra
d [N
s/m
]
w [rad/s]
Radiation coefficient
Crad
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
F exc
[N/m
] x
10
00
0
w [rad/s]
Excitation coefficient
Cexc
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1.0
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
φex
c [r
ad]
w [rad/s]
Excitation phasePhexc
COEFFICIENTI IDRODINAMICI
MODELLO ELETTROMAGNETICO – FORZE REATTIVE
POLITECNICO DI MILANO
IPOTESI:Unità elementari in serie;Flusso magnetico concentrato nei denti (vincoli);Andamento sinusoidale del flusso concatenato (F1);Forze di bordo sono trascurate;Correnti parassite ed effetto Joule trascurati;Il generatore è studiato nel suo equivalente circuitale;
1. FLUSSO MAGNETICO CONCATENATO:
2. FORZA ELETTROMOTRICE INDOTTA:
4. POTENZA GENERATA:
6. POTENZA MECCANICA:
7. FORZA DI SMORZAMENTO:
3. CORRENTE ISTANTANEA
8. FATTORE DI SMORZAMENTO:
MODELLO ELETTROMECCANICO
Fasi A, B, C
Unità elementare – Pole widthCircuito elementareModello elettromeccanico
MOLLA SMORZATORE
RISULTATI – DINAMICA DELLA BOA
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Mad
d [k
g]w [rad/s]
Added mass:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=4.5
D=5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
F exc
[N/m
]x
10
00
0
w [rad/s]
Excitation coefficient:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=4.5
D=5
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Cra
d [N
s/m
]
w [rad/s]
Radiation coefficient:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=5
D=4.5
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
φex
c [r
ad]
w [rad/s]
Excitation phase:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=4.5
D=5
Analisi di sensitività dei coefficienti idrodinamici del galleggiante al variare di:
AFFONDAMENTO
DIAMETRO
Programma commerciale: problema di moto a potenziale ad elementi di contorno (spettrale) i carichi dell’onda
BOA CILINDRICA
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Mad
d [k
g]w [rad/s]
Added mass:"draft effect"
Zd=0.2
Zd=0.3
Zd=0.4
Zd=0.6
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Cra
d [N
s/m
]
w [rad/s]
Radiation coefficient:"draft effect"
Zd=0.2
Zd=0.3
Zd=0.4
Zd=0.6
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
F exc
[N/m
]x
10
00
0
w [rad/s]
Excitation coefficient:"draft effect"
Zd=0.2
Zd=0.3
Zd=0.4
Zd=0.6
-1.6
-1.4
-1.2
-1.0
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
φex
c [r
ad]
w [rad/s]
Excitation phase:"draft effect"
Zd=0.2
Zd=0.3
Zd=0.4
Zd=0.6
RISULTATI – DINAMICA DELLA BOA
POLITECNICO DI MILANO
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Mad
d [k
g]w [rad/s]
Added mass:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=4.5
D=5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
F exc
[N/m
]x
10
00
0
w [rad/s]
Excitation coefficient:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=4.5
D=5
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Cra
d [N
s/m
]
w [rad/s]
Radiation coefficient:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=5
D=4.5
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
φex
c [r
ad]
w [rad/s]
Excitation phase:"diameter effect"
D=2
D=3
D=3.5
D=4
D=4.5
D=5
Analisi di sensitività dei coefficienti idrodinamici del galleggiante al variare di:
AFFONDAMENTO
DIAMETRO
Programma commerciale: problema di moto a potenziale ad elementi di contorno (spettrale) i carichi dell’onda
BOA CILINDRICA
RISULTATI – MODELLO ACCOPPIATO- al variare di LG
POLITECNICO DI MILANO
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG6: POWER MATRIX [kW]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
2
4
6
8
10
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+Lg10: POWER MATRIX [kW]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
2
4
6
8
10
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG20: POWER MATRIX [kW]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
2
4
6
8
10
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG6: CAPTURE WIDTH MATRIX [%]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG10: CAPTURE WIDTH MATRIX [%]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG20: CAPTURE WIDTH MATRIX [%]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG6: DAMPING [kN s/m]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
15
15.5
16
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG6: MEAN VELOCITY [m/s]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG10: DAMPING [kN s/m]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
26
26.5
27
27.5
28
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG20: MEAN VELOCITY [m/s]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG20: DAMPING [kN s/m]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
53
53.5
54
54.5
TP [s]
HS [
m]
B3c+LG20: MEAN VELOCITY [m/s]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
LG6 LG10 LG20
POTENZA MEDIA[kW]
ENERGIA CATTURATA[%]
FATTORE DISMORZAMENTO[kN s/m]
RISULTATI – MODELLO ACCOPPIATO- al variare di D
B2+LG10 B3+LG10 B5+LG10
POTENZA MEDIA[kW]
ENERGIA CATTURATA[%]
FATTORE DISMORZAMENTO[kN s/m]
TP [s]
HS [
m]
LG10+B2: POWER MATRIX [kW]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
2
4
6
8
10
TP [s]
HS [
m]
LG10+B3: POWER MATRIX [kW]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
2
4
6
8
10
TP [s]
HS [
m]
LG10+B2: CAPTURE WIDTH [%]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
TP [s]
HS [
m]
LG10+B3: CAPTURE WIDTH [%]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
5
10
15
20
25
TP [s]
HS [
m]
Lg10+B5: POWER MATRIX [kW]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
2
4
6
8
10
TP [s]
HS [
m]
LG10+B5: CAPTURE WIDTH [%]
4 6 8 10
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
0
5
10
15
20
25