Phase I of the OC6 project is focused on examining why offshore wind design tools underpredict the response (loads/motion) of the OC5-DeepCwind semisubmersible at its surge and pitch natural frequencies. Previous investigations showed that the underprediction was primarily related to nonlinear hydrodynamic loading, so two new validation campaigns were performed to separately examine the different hydrodynamic load components. In this paper, we validate a variety of tools against this new test data, focusing on the ability to accurately model the low-frequency loads on a semisubmersible floater when held fixed under wave excitation and when forced to oscillate in the surge direction. However, it is observed that models providing better load predictions in these two scenarios do not necessarily produce a more accurate motion response in a moored configuration.

Wave energy converters (WECs) are commonly designed and analyzed using numerical models that combine multibody dynamics with hydrodynamic models based on the Cummins equation and linearized hydrodynamic coefficients. These modeling methods are attractive design tools because they are computationally inexpensive and do not require the use of highperformance computing resources necessitated by high-fidelity methods, such as Navier-Stokes computational fluid dynamics. Modeling hydrodynamics using linear coefficients assumes that the device undergoes small motions and that the wetted surface area of the devices is approximately constant. WEC devices, however, are typically designed to undergo large motions to maximize power extraction, calling into question the validity of assuming that linear hydrodynamic models accurately capture the relevant fluid-structure interactions.In this paper, we study how calculating buoyancy and Froude-Krylov forces from the instantaneous position of a WEC device changes WEC simulation results compared to simulations that use linear hydrodynamic coefficients. First, we describe the WEC-Sim tool used to perform simulations and how the ability to model instantaneous forces was incorporated into WEC-Sim. We then use a simplified one-body WEC device to validate the model and to demonstrate how accounting for these instantaneously calculated forces affects the accuracy of simulation results, such as device motions, hydrodynamic forces, and power generation.Other aspects of WEC-Sim code development and verification are presented in a companion paper [1] that is also being presented at OMAE2014. INTRODUCTIONWave energy is the most abundant source of marine hydrokinetic energy in the United States and is a plentiful resource around the globe [2]. Recent estimates indicate that the U.S. wave energy resource is 2,600 TWh/year [3]. If it is possible to extract even a small fraction of this energy, there is potential to satisfy a significant amount of U.S. electricity demand [4]. This finding has stimulated commercial and governmental interest in developing wave energy converter (WEC) technologies, and indicates that wave energy could play a significant role in the world's renewable energy portfolio for years to come. Nevertheless, WEC devices are at an early stage of development, corresponding to technology readiness levels (TRLs) 3 through 5, and are not yet a commercially viable technology.Over the past several decades, open-source numerical modeling tools have helped the wind turbine industry achieve commercial viability by enabling the rapid development, analysis, and certification of system designs. The recent emergence of the WEC industry has created a need for a similar set of WEC design and analysis tools that enable the advancement of WEC technologies. Several companies have developed WEC modeling tools, such as WaveDyn, OrcaFlex, and AQWA, that meet many of the needs of the WEC research and development community. Previous experience at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NR...

To promote and support the wave energy industry, a wave energy converter (WEC) design tool, WEC-Sim, is being developed by Sandia National Laboratories and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. In this paper, the WEC-Sim code is used to model a point absorber WEC designed by the U.S. Department of Energy's reference model project. Preliminary verification was performed by comparing results of the WEC-Sim simulation through a code-to-code comparison, utilizing the commercial codes ANSYS-AQWA, WaveDyn, and OrcaFlex. A preliminary validation of the code was also performed by comparing WEC-Sim simulation results to experimental wave tank tests. INTRODUCTIONEven though wave energy converters (WECs) have been conceptualized and patented for over a century, most WEC developers are in technology readiness levels (TRLs) 3 through 5, corresponding to basic research and development [1][2][3]. Several developers have deployed scaled devices in the open ocean, and there have been a few full-scale grid connected deployments, such as the WaveGen Limpet in Islay and the Ocean Power Technologies (OPT) PowerBuoy in Hawaii. The industry, however, has yet to reach commercial viability, corresponding to TRL 9. As a result, WECs remain a nascent technology, and are highly dependent on numerical modeling and experimental testing to develop innovative designs and advanced control strategies.

Modeled nearshore wave propagation was investigated downstream of simulated wave energy converters (WECs) to evaluate overall near-and far-field effects of WEC arrays. Model sensitivity to WEC characteristics and WEC array deployment scenarios was evaluated using a modified version of an industry standard wave model, Simulating WAves Nearshore (SWAN), which allows the incorporation of device-specific WEC characteristics to specify obstacle transmission. The sensitivity study illustrated that WEC device type and subsequently its size directly resulted in wave height variations in the lee of the WEC array. Wave heights decreased up to 30% between modeled scenarios with and without WECs for large arrays (100 devices) of relatively sizable devices (26 m in diameter) with peak power generation near to the modeled 2 incident wave height. Other WEC types resulted in less than 15% differences in modeled wave height with and without WECs, with lesser influence for WECs less than 10 m in diameter. Wave directions and periods were largely insensitive to changes in parameters. However, additional model parameterization and analysis are required to fully explore the model sensitivity of peak wave period and mean wave direction to the varying of the parameters.

The International Energy Agency Technology Collaboration Programme for Ocean Energy Systems (OES) initiated the OES Wave Energy Conversion Modelling Task, which focused on the verification and validation of numerical models for simulating wave energy converters (WECs). The long-term goal is to assess the accuracy of and establish confidence in the use of numerical models used in design as well as power performance assessment of WECs. To establish this confidence, the authors used different existing computational modelling tools to simulate given tasks to identify uncertainties related to simulation methodologies: (i) linear potential flow methods; (ii) weakly nonlinear Froude–Krylov methods; and (iii) fully nonlinear methods (fully nonlinear potential flow and Navier–Stokes models). This article summarizes the code-to-code task and code-to-experiment task that have been performed so far in this project, with a focus on investigating the impact of different levels of nonlinearities in the numerical models. Two different WECs were studied and simulated. The first was a heaving semi-submerged sphere, where free-decay tests and both regular and irregular wave cases were investigated in a code-to-code comparison. The second case was a heaving float corresponding to a physical model tested in a wave tank. We considered radiation, diffraction, and regular wave cases and compared quantities, such as the WEC motion, power output and hydrodynamic loading.