Physical wave basin tests with a focus on uncertainty estimation have been conducted on a sphere subjected to wave loads at Aalborg University as part of the effort of the OES Wave Energy Converters Modeling Verification and Validation (formerly, OES Task 10) working group to increase credibility of numerical modeling of WECs. The tests are referred to as the Kramer Sphere Cases, and the present note is dealing with wave excitation force tests on a fixed model. The present note is including details to facilitate CFD models which replicate the physical setup in detail.
This paper presents a numerical benchmark study of wave propagation due to a paddle motion using different high-fidelity numerical models, which are capable of replicating the nearly actual physical wave tank testing. A full time series of the measured wave generation paddle motion that was used to generate wave propagation in the physical wave tank will be utilized in each of the models contributed by the participants of International Energy Agency Ocean Energy Systems Task 10, which includes both computational fluid dynamics and smoothed particle hydrodynamics models. The high-fidelity simulations of the physical wave test case will allow for the evaluation of the initial transient effects from wave ramp-up and its evolution in the wave tank over time for two representative regular waves with varying levels of nonlinearity. Metrics like the predicted wave surface elevation at select wave probes, wave period, and phase-shift in time will be assessed to evaluate the relative accuracy of numerical models versus experimental data within specified time intervals. These models will serve as a guide for modelers in the wave energy community and provide a base case to allow further and more detailed numerical modeling of the fixed Kramer Sphere Cases under wave excitation force wave tank testing.
The wave loads and the resulting motions of floating wave energy converters are traditionally computed using linear radiation–diffraction methods. Yet for certain cases such as survival conditions, phase control and wave energy converters operating in the resonance region, more complete mathematical models such as computational fluid dynamics are preferred and over the last 5 years, computational fluid dynamics has become more frequently used in the wave energy field. However, rigorous estimation of numerical errors, convergence rates and uncertainties associated with computational fluid dynamics simulations have largely been overlooked in the wave energy sector. In this article, we apply formal verification and validation techniques to computational fluid dynamics simulations of a passively controlled point absorber.
The phase control causes the motion response to be highly nonlinear even for almost linear incident waves. First, we show that the computational fluid dynamics simulations have acceptable agreement to experimental data. We then present a verification and validation study focusing on the solution verification covering spatial and temporal discretization, iterative and domain modelling errors. It is shown that the dominating source of errors is, as expected, the spatial discretization, but temporal and iterative errors cannot be neglected. Using hexahedral cells with low aspect ratio and 30 cells per wave height, we obtain results with less than 5% uncertainty in motion response (except for surge) and restraining forces for the buoy without phase control. The amplified nonlinear response due to phase control caused a large increase in numerical uncertainty, illustrating the difficulty to obtain reliable solutions for highly nonlinear responses, and that much denser meshes are required for such cases.