Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Weber, Jochem

Publications and source records attributed to Weber, Jochem.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Proceedings of the 2021 Airborne Wind Energy Workshop

On March 2-3, 2021, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted a virtual workshop to evaluate the status, potential development, and technical viability of AWE systems as a source of energy in the United States. Stakeholder input provided at the workshop will contribute to the report to Congress. This report summarizes key workshop findings, current technology research and development activities in the United States, and opportunities and potential modes of collaboration and coordination for future technology research and development activities. The workshop focused on U.S. stakeholders in AWE, with approximately 100 experts and industry stakeholders from AWE technology developers, operators, engineering firms, consultants, government, national laboratories, and university researchers. The workshop began with an explanation from DOE's Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO) Technology Manager, Ben Hallissy, of the context and purpose of the workshop, including a request from Congress that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) deliver a "report on the potential for, and technical viability of, airborne wind energy systems to provide a significant source of energy in the United States, including a summary of research, development, demonstration, and commercialization needs, including an estimate of Federal funding requirements, to further examine and validate the technical and economic viability of airborne wind energy concepts over the 10-year period." The workshop began with brief introductions from attendees who explained their interest in AWE. Nicolas El Hayek of Planair summarized the proceedings from the AWE workshop held in September 2020 by the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Task 11. This was followed by a presentation by Roland Schmehl of TU-Delft summarizing European AWE R&D efforts. Chris Vermillion of North Carolina State University and Jason Jonkman of NREL presented an overview of U.S. R&D efforts. Then five panelists discussed AWE markets, sizes of AWE systems, challenges, and opportunities. Panelists included: Cristina Archer, professor at the College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment and associate director at the Center for Research in Wind (CReW) at the University of Delaware; Stephan Brabeck, chief technology officer at SkySails; Thierry Delahave, innovation and technology development lead at Saipem; Rob Creighton, founder and chief executive officer at WindLift; and David Schaefer, founder and chief executive officer at eWind Solutions. The second day of the workshop began with a brief overview of five key topics that are crucial to enabling AWE in the United States. These topics range from estimates of the U.S. wind resource, technical generation potential, economic analysis, environmental challenges, status of current technology and R&D activities, and needed activities to enable commercialization of AWE. This set the stage for a robust discussion in breakout groups where individuals could offer their opinions on the potential opportunities for AWE in the United States. The following topics were discussed in the breakout groups: resource potential and energy output, technical potential, social and environmental impacts, and permitting, techno-economic analysis and markets, technology assessment and upscaling and demonstration and commercialization needs. The second day concluded with reports by the NREL research team, communicating the key themes and outcomes from each of the breakout group discussions.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

Existing Ocean Energy Performance Metrics

This document summarizes existing Marine and Hydrokinetic (MHK) performance metrics known to the United States Department of Energy and national laboratories. This document was updated based on feedback from the MHK Energy community, however, this summary still may not be exhaustive. There are a wide variety of needs and uses for metrics. All stakeholders, such as developers, funding agencies, investors, and researchers, have a need for metrics and their many uses. It is evident that the sector will benefit from clear techno economic performance metrics to guide development towards success. There are international efforts underway to bring the community together to (1) understand what metrics/approaches are being used currently and (2) reach a global framework on the approach to the measurement of success. This document serves to list existing metrics known to the U.S. at the present, and is not meant to represent international efforts or consensus.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2018

Wave Energy

After reflecting on the history of ocean wave energy research and technology development, the most prominent classification schemes for wave energy converter (WEC) technology concepts are produced, highlighting the diversity of WEC technologies that were or are under development at different levels of maturity and intensity. Three advanced WEC technology examples are provided in this article. The ocean wave energy resource is addressed with respect to its global energy potential, local variability, and issues associated with the established forms of spectral power presentation. The spectrum of theoretical modeling approaches is described, along with the range of simulation tasks and related tools. This article also covers the specific aspects of the physical modeling and scaled model testing of WES systems and subsystems. Following a comparison of the engineering and design challenges of wave energy and wind energy technology development, the WEC technology development status and process is described and analyzed. Finally, the requirements for successful WEC technology development for achieving economic WEC technology and energy production under commercial conditions are discussed, including a number of possible development and innovation pathways.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2017

Technology Performance Level Assessment Methodology.

The technology performance level (TPL) assessments can be applied at all technology development stages and associated technology readiness levels (TRLs). Even, and particularly, at low TRLs the TPL assessment is very effective as it, holistically, considers a wide range of WEC attributes that determine the techno-economic performance potential of the WEC farm when fully developed for commercial operation. The TPL assessment also highlights potential showstoppers at the earliest possible stage of the WEC technology development. Hence, the TPL assessment identifies the technology independent “performance requirements.” In order to achieve a successful solution, the entirety of the performance requirements within the TPL must be considered because, in the end, all the stakeholder needs must be achieved. The basis for performing a TPL assessment comes from the information provided in a dedicated format, the Technical Submission Form (TSF). The TSF requests information from the WEC developer that is required to answer the questions posed in the TPL assessment document.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2017

Technical Submission Form: Technical Specification of a Wave Energy Farm.

The Wave - SPARC project developed the Technology Performance Level (TPL) assessment procedure based on a rigorous Systems Engineering exercise. The TPL assessment allows a whole system evaluation of Wave Energy Conversion Technology by measuring it against the requirements determined through the Systems Engineering exercise. The TPL assessment is intended to be useful in technology evaluation; in technology innovation; in allocation of public or priva te investment, and; in making equipment purchasing decisions. This Technical Submission Form (TSF) serves the purpose of collecting relevant and complete information, in a technology agnostic way, to allow TPL assessment s to be made by third party assessor s. The intended usage of this document is that the organization or people that are performing the role of developers or promoters of a particular technology will use this form to provide the information necessary for the organization or people who are perf orming the assessor role to use the TPL assessment.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2017

Systems Engineering Applied to the Development of a Wave Energy Farm.

A motivation for undertaking this stakeholder requirements analysis and Systems Engineering exercise is to document the requirements for successful wave energy farms to facilitate better design and better design assessments. A difficulty in wave energy technology development is the absence to date of a verifiable minimum viable product against which the merits of new products might be measured. A consequence of this absence is that technology development progress, technology value, and technology funding have largely been measured, associated with, and driven by technology readiness, measured in technology readiness levels (TRLs). Originating primarily from the space and defense industries, TRLs focus on procedural implementation of technology developments of large and complex engineering projects, where cost is neither mission critical nor a key design driver. The key deficiency with the TRL approach in the context of wave energy conversion is that WEC technology development has been too focused on commercial readiness and not enough on the stakeholder requirements and particularly economic viability required for market entry.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2016

Guidance on the Technology Performance Level (TPL) Assessment Methodology

This document presents the revised Technology Performance Level (TPL) assessment methodology. There are three parts to this revised methodology 1) the Stakeholder Needs and Assessment Guidance (this document), 2) the Technical Submission form, 3) the TPL scoring spreadsheet. The TPL assessment is designed to give a technology neutral or agnostic assessment of any wave energy converter technology. The focus of the TPL is on the performance of the technology in meeting the customer’s needs. The original TPL is described in [1, 2] and those references also detail the critical differences in the nature of the TPL when compared to the more widely used technology readiness level (TRL). (Wave energy TRL is described in [3]). The revised TPL is particularly intended to be useful to investors and also to assist technology developers to conduct comprehensive assessments in a way that is meaningful and attractive to investors. The revised TPL assessment methodology has been derived through a structured Systems Engineering approach. This was a formal process which involved analyzing customer and stakeholder needs through the discipline of Systems Engineering. The results of the process confirmed the high level of completeness of the original methodology presented in [1] (as used in the Wave Energy Prize judging) and now add a significantly increased level of detail in the assessment and an improved more investment focused structure. The revised TPL also incorporates the feedback of the Wave Energy Prize judges.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2016

Technology Performance Level (TPL) Scoring Tool

Three different ways of combining scores are used in the revised formulation. These are arithmetic mean, geometric mean and multiplication with normalisation. Arithmetic mean is used when combining scores that measure similar attributes, e.g. used for combining costs. The arithmetic mean has the property that it is similar to a logical OR, e.g. when combining costs it does not matter what the individual costs are only what the combined cost is. Geometric mean and Multiplication are used when combining scores that measure disparate attributes. Multiplication is similar to a logical AND, it is used to combine ‘must haves.’ As a result, this method is more punitive than the geometric mean; to get a good score in the combined result it is necessary to have a good score in ALL of the inputs. e.g. the different types of survivability are ‘must haves.’ On balance, the revised TPL is probably less punitive than the previous spreadsheet, multiplication is used sparingly as a method of combining scores. This is in line with the feedback of the Wave Energy Prize judges.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2016

WEC Farm Functions: Defining the Behaviors of the Farm

Capabilities and functions are hierarchical structures (i.e. taxonomies) that are used in a systems engineering framework to identify complimentary requirements for the system: what the system must do to achieve what it must be. In the case of capabilities, the taxonomy embodies the list of characteristics that are desired, from the perspective of the stakeholders, for the system to be successful. In terms of the functions, the hierarchy represents the solution agnostic (i.e. independent of specific design embodiments) elements that are needed to meet the stakeholder requirements. This paper will focus on the development of the functions. The functions define the fundamental elements of the solution that must be provided in order to achieve the mission and deliver the capabilities. They identify the behaviors the farm must possess, i.e. the farm must be able to generate and deliver electricity from wave power. High-level functions are independent of the technology or design used to implement the function. However, detailed functions may begin to border on specific design choices. Hence a strong effort has been made to maintain functions that are design agnostic.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗