SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navy's Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navy's Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawai'i (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of O'ahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navy's Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawai'i (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navy's Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navy's Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission. This month's data only covers the period Dec 1-6, 2016. On Dec 7, the Azura was shut down and disconnected in preparation for its Dec 8 removal from the WETS 30 m site. The Azura will be modified and re-deployed in 2017.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
TRIAXYS data from the NNMREC-SETS, for Nov. 2014 - Jan. 2015, and May 2015 - Dec. 2015. The data consists of: Date, Time, significant wave height (1 hour average), significant wave period (1 hour average).
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
Data files for the NWEI Azura grid-connected deployment at the 30-meter berth of the US Navys Wave Energy Test Site (WETS 30m Site) at the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base Hawaii (MCBH) on the windward (northeast) coast of the island of Oahu, HI. See general documentation describing specifics of the data files and formats in a separate submission.
This project addressed Topic 3: “Wave Measurement Instrumentation for Feed Forward Controls” under the FOA number DE-FOA-0000971. The overall goal of the program was to develop a phase-resolving wave forecasting technique for application to the active control of Wave Energy Conversion (WEC) devices. We have developed an approach that couples a wave imaging marine radar with a phase-resolving linear wave model for real-time wave field reconstruction and forward propagation of the wave field in space and time. The scope of the project was to develop and assess the performance of this novel forecasting system. Specific project goals were as follows: Develop and verify a fast, GPU-based (Graphical Processing Unit) wave propagation model suitable for phase-resolved computation of nearshore wave transformation over variable bathymetry; Compare the accuracy and speed of performance of the wave model against a deep water model in their ability to predict wave field transformation in the intermediate water depths (50 to 70 m) typical of planned WEC sites; Develop and implement a variational assimilation algorithm that can ingest wave imaging radar observations and estimate the time-varying wave conditions offshore of the domain of interest such that the observed wave field is best reconstructed throughout the domain and then use this to produce model forecasts for a given WEC location; Collect wave-resolving marine radar data, along with relevant in situ wave data, at a suitable wave energy test site, apply the algorithm to the field data, assess performance, and identify any necessary improvements; and Develop a production cost estimate that addresses the affordability of the wave forecasting technology and include in the Final Report. The developed forecasting algorithm (“Wavecast”) was evaluated for both speed and accuracy against a substantial synthetic dataset. Early in the project, performance tests definitively demonstrated that the system was capable of forecasting in real-time, as the GPU-based wave model backbone was very computationally efficient. The data assimilation algorithm was developed on a polar grid domain in order to match the sampling characteristics of the observation system (wave imaging marine radar). For verification purposes, a substantial set of synthetic wave data (i.e. forward runs of the wave model) were generated to be used as ground truth for comparison to the reconstructions and forecasts produced by Wavecast. For these synthetic cases, Wavecast demonstrated very good accuracy, for example, typical forecast correlation coefficients were between 0.84-0.95 when compared to the input data. Dependencies on shadowing, observational noise, and forecast horizon were also identified. During the second year of the project, a short field deployment was conducted in order to assess forecast accuracy under field conditions. For this, a radar was installed on a fishing vessel and observations were collected at the South Energy Test Site (SETS) off the coast of Newport, OR. At the SETS site, simultaneous in situ wave observations were also available owing to an ongoing field project funded separately. Unfortunately, the position and heading information that was available for the fishing vessel were not of sufficient accuracy in order to validate the forecast in a phase-resolving sense. Instead, a spectral comparison was made between the Wavecast forecast and the data from the in situ wave buoy. Although the wave and wind conditions during the field test were complex, the comparison showed a promising reconstruction of the wave spectral shape, where both peaks in the bimodal spectrum were represented. However, the total reconstructed spectral energy (across all directions and frequencies) was limited to 44% of the observed spectrum. Overall, wave-by-wave forecasting using a data assimilation approach based on wave imaging radar observations and a physics-based wave model shows promise for short-term phase-resolved predictions. Two recommendations for future work are as follows: first, we would recommend additional focused field campaigns for algorithm validation. The field campaign should be long enough to capture a range of wave conditions relevant to the target application and WEC site. In addition, it will be crucial to make sure the vessel of choice has high accuracy position and heading instrumentation (this instrumentation is commercially available but not standard on commercial fishing vessels). The second recommendation is to expand the model physics in the wave model backbone to include some nonlinear effects. Specifically, the third-order correction to the wave speed due to amplitude dispersion would be the next step in order to more accurately represent the phase speeds of large amplitude waves.
Best practices and international standards for determining n-year return period extreme wave (sea states) conditions allow wave energy converter designers and project developers the option to apply simple univariate or more complex bivariate extreme value analysis methods. The present study compares extreme sea state estimates derived from univariate and bivariate methods and investigates the performance of spectral wave models for predicting extreme sea states at buoy locations within several regional wave climates along the US East and West Coasts. Two common third-generation spectral wave models are evaluated, a WAVEWATCH III® model with a grid resolution of 4 arc-minutes (6–7 km), and a Simulating WAves Nearshore model, with a coastal resolution of 200–300 m. Both models are used to generate multi-year hindcasts, from which extreme sea state statistics used for wave conditions characterization can be derived and compared to those based on in-situ observations at National Data Buoy Center stations. Comparison of results using different univariate and bivariate methods from the same data source indicates reasonable agreement on average. Discrepancies are predominantly random. Large discrepancies are common and increase with return period. There is a systematic underbias for extreme significant wave heights derived from model hindcasts compared to those derived from buoy measurements. This underbias is dependent on model spatial resolution. However, simple linear corrections can effectively compensate for this bias. A similar approach is not possible for correcting model-derived environmental contours, but other methods, e.g., machine learning, should be explored.