energies

Article
Wave Energy Harnessing in Shallow Water through
Oscillating Bodies
Marco Negri * and Stefano Malavasi
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Politecnico di Milano, 20133 Milan, Italy;
[Link]@[Link]
* Correspondence: [Link]@[Link]; Tel.: +39-02-2399-6260

Received: 25 July 2018; Accepted: 10 October 2018; Published: 12 October 2018

Abstract: This paper deals with wave energy conversion in shallow water, analyzing the performance
of two different oscillating-body systems. The first one is a heaving float, which is a system known
in the literature. The second one is obtained by coupling the heaving float with a surging paddle.
In order to check the different behaviors of the multibody system and the single-body heaving float,
physical models of the two systems have been tested in a wave flume, by placing them at various water
depths along a sloping bottom. The systems have been tested with monochromatic waves. For each
water depth, several tests have been performed varying the geometrical and mechanical parameters
of the two systems, in order to find their best configurations. It has been found that the multibody
system is more energetic when the float and the paddle are close to each other. Capture width ratio
has been found to significantly vary with water depth for both systems: in particular, capture width
ratio of the heaving float (also within the multibody system) increases as water depth increases, while
capture width ratio of the paddle (within the multibody system) increases as water depth decreases.
At the end, the capture width ratio of the multibody system is almost always higher than that of
the heaving float, and it increases as water depth increases on average; however, the multibody
advantage over single body is significant for water depth less than the characteristic dimension of the
system, and decreases as water depth increases.

Keywords: wave power; wave energy converter; heave; surge; shallow water; capture width ratio

1. Introduction
Renewable energies are increasingly becoming a main topic of interest among scientists due to the
need for sustainable development, the increasing energy world request and the expected depletion of
fossil fuels. Among the third generation renewable energies, wave energy is one of the most promising.
Since the second half of the last century many attempts to harvest wave energy have been made, but
no device has yet to reach full commercial production, while several have achieved the prototype
stage, e.g., the Wavestar (Wave Star Energy A/S, Brøndby, Denmark [Link]),
the Seabased AB (Seabased industry AB, Lysekil, Sweden [Link]), the Ceto (Carnegie
Wave Energy, Belmont, Australia [Link] and many other important
ones like the Oyster (Aquamarine Power, Edinburgh, UK) and the Pelamis (Pelamis Wave Power,
Edinburgh, UK) whose further development ceased.
Wave energy converters (WECs) are very various and can be classified according different criteria:
a common subdivision of WECs is according to their working principle [1], which are oscillating water
column (OWC), oscillating body, overtopping. Other important classifications are according to location
(offshore, nearshore, shoreline) and directional characteristic with respect to the oncoming wave (point
absorber, attenuator, terminator) [2]. Reviews [1,2] are extensive works including the characterization

Energies 2018, 11, 2730; doi:10.3390/en11102730 [Link]/journal/energies

Energies 2018, 11, 2730 2 of 17

of wave energy resource and the compendium of WEC technologies. A more recent review of wave
energy technology can be found in reference [3].
Wave energy exploitation still has high investment costs, therefore, in the last ten years, hybrid
solutions with other renewable sources like wind and solar have been proposed; this allows limiting
installation costs and achieve a more regular energy production (see for example [4]). On the other
hand, wave energy exploitation is economically advantageous for islands and remote coastal areas,
where the electric grid is absent and fuel supply is difficult; reviews of wave energy and hybrid (wave,
tidal, wind, solar) technologies suitable for these areas can be found respectively in references [5,6].
One of the principal issues with WECs is the ratio between energy production and costs. Offshore
system (water depth >50 m) seems to be preferable due to the greater energy amount of the open sea
waves, while shoreline systems usually have a lower energy availability, due to energy dissipation
caused by the travelling of the waves in shallow waters. Exceptions to this generalization are those
particular places (promontories or isles), called hot spots, where, for refraction and diffraction effects,
a concentration of wave energy can be found [7]. On the other hand, offshore WEC have higher costs
of installation, maintenance and connection to the electrical grid compared to shoreline system, due to
obvious reasons of shore proximity.
The reduction of wave energy from offshore to nearshore is better explained in reference [7]: If it
is true that the gross wave energy significantly reduces, on the contrary the exploitable wave energy
can be quite similar. The exploitable wave energy is directional-resolved and does not include the sea
storms. Folley and Whittaker [7] found, analyzing two sea sites in North Atlantic coast of Scotland,
that the exploitable wave energy is reduced only by 7% and 22% from offshore to nearshore.
In the same work, it is also shown that the bottom slope influences wave energy dissipation,
and that a steeper bottom causes less energy dissipation by bottom friction, as waves travel a shorter
distance in shallow depths to reach the nearshore zone. In reference [8], numerical simulations of
wave propagation along a sloping beach are performed, considering various wave heights and periods,
and beach slopes. It is shown that, for example, a wave with significant wave height Hm0 = 4 m loses
only about 20% of its power when travelling from deep water to a depth of 10 m, on a 1:100 sloping
beach. Thanks to these considerations we can understand why nearshore sites have been revalued
for wave energy harvesting, and several studies are being made to estimate the energy availability in
many nearshore places, e.g., references [9–11]. Indeed, wave energy dissipation in the nearshore zone
depends on so many factors, like wave properties, angle of propagation, bottom slope and bottom
roughness [12] so that wave energy availability may significantly vary along the coast, and each site
should be individually characterized.
Besides water depth, also local irregularities of the seabed affect the WEC behavior, due to their
influence on the wave propagation (see for example [13]). Therefore, localizing a suitable position for a
WEC is a matter of fundamental importance; in reference [14], the numerical simulation of various
well-known WECs in several points of the Portuguese nearshore also showed that the local energy
availability is not the only factor affecting the WEC energy production.
It is known that water particle trajectories in shallow water waves are different than the ones in
deep water; the elliptic shape of the trajectories causes nearshore waves to have a higher surge force
than offshore waves; in reference [15] it is shown that the capture width ratio (CWR) of a surging
oscillating flap in 10 m water depth can be more than double than in deep water. For the Oyster,
a bottom-hinged pitching-surging flap of 12 m of width installed in 12 m water depth (the flap was
surface-piercing), CWR up to 70% was evaluated [16].
Nearshore sites are still good places for heave oscillating bodies, as evidenced by the Danish
Wavestar prototype located at Hanstholm, which is placed in a water depth of about 6 m. The Wavestar
prototype is composed of two hemispherical pitching-heaving floats of 5 m diameter, each of which is
supported by an arm that is pivoted to a fixed structure above water [17]. A peculiarity of Wavestar is
that the floats are aligned along the wave propagation direction, in order to supply a continuous force
to the power take-off (PTO) system as wave travels through the floats.
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 3 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17

In this work, we have compared the performances of two similar WECs in shallow water placed
on a sloping
In this bottom,
work, weinhave water depths the
compared of the order of the
performances WEC
of two diameter.
similar WECsOne is a pitching-heaving
in shallow water placed
float,
on asimilar
slopingtobottom,
the Wavestar
in watersystemdepths[17],
of theexcept
orderfor the WEC
of the fact that the arm
diameter. One that
is asupports the float is
pitching-heaving
float, similar
aligned along wave to thepropagation
Wavestar system [17], except
direction for thewe
(hereinafter factwill
thatrefer
the arm thatsystem
to this supports the float is
as “float-only”).
Thealigned
heaving along wave
float propagation
is the most basic direction (hereinafter WEC
oscillating-body we will (seerefer to this system
reference [1] forassome“float-only”).
examples).
The heaving float is the most basic oscillating-body WEC (see reference
Generally, the heaving float is studied in deep water (>40 m) and, to the author knowledge, there is not [1] for some examples).
Generally,
a specific studytheon heaving float is studied
the influence of waterindepth;
deep water
in this(>40
work,m)we and, to the author
investigate the knowledge,
behavior of there is
a heaving
notina water
float specific studyranging
depth on the influence
between 0.6 of water
and 2 depth; in this work, we investigate the behavior of a
float diameters.
heaving float in water depth ranging
The other WEC tested in this work is the Energy between 0.6 and 2 float
Double diameters.
System (EDS), a multibody system
The other WEC tested in this work is the Energy Double System (EDS), a multibody system that
that consists of the pitching-heaving float plus a pitching-surging paddle (Figure 1). By removing
consists of the pitching-heaving float plus a pitching-surging paddle (Figure 1). By removing the
the paddle from EDS, the float-only system is obtained. In the perspective of an array arrangement,
paddle from EDS, the float-only system is obtained. In the perspective of an array arrangement, the
the EDS modules would be aligned parallel to wave front, unlike Wavestar system whose modules are
EDS modules would be aligned parallel to wave front, unlike Wavestar system whose modules are
orthogonal to the wave front. In the EDS system, the paddle is supported by an arm hinged on the main
orthogonal to the wave front. In the EDS system, the paddle is supported by an arm hinged on the
arm. The original idea behind this WEC is to harness both heave and surge wave forces, in order to ensure
main arm. The original idea behind this WEC is to harness both heave and surge wave forces, in order
a large exploitation
to ensure of the wave resource
a large exploitation of the wave andresource
to obtainand a good flexibility
to obtain a good toward different
flexibility towardseadifferent
conditions.
seaUsually,
[Link] WECs are composed by two bodies that exploit the same wave force (typically
heave force,
Usually, reference
see multibody[1]); WECs the advantage
are composed of these
by WECs is thatthat
two bodies the PTOexploitcantheusesame
the relative motion
wave force
between the two bodies instead of reacting against a fixed point
(typically heave force, see reference [1]); the advantage of these WECs is that the PTO can use theon the seabed or on the ground.
In relative
this way, there between
motion is the additional benefitinstead
the two bodies of avoiding the practical
of reacting against aissues fixed of foundation
point construction.
on the seabed or on
Examples
the ground. of heaving two-bodies
In this way, there is WECs are [18,19].
the additional benefit of avoiding the practical issues of foundation
The peculiarity
construction. of EDS
Examples is that the
of heaving two bodies
two-bodies WECs composing
are [18,19]. it exploit different wave forces, heave
and surge. The Inpeculiarity
this work, of we
EDSanalyze
is that the
the two bodies composing
advantages of coupling it exploit
a heaving different
float andwave forces, heave
a surging paddle
in and
a sole surge.
WEC, In and
this work, we analyze
we verify whetherthe it advantages
is energeticallyof coupling a heaving
advantageous float andto
compared a surging paddle
the heaving float,
in a sole WEC, and we verify whether it is energetically
given that the paddle would be a relatively simple addition to the latter. advantageous compared to the heaving float,
given
EDSthathasthesome paddle wouldadvantages,
important be a relatively suchsimple addition to
the relatively low thecosts
[Link] to its nearshore positioning,
EDS has
the possibility some
to be important
attached advantages,
to existing structures,suchand thetherelatively
modularity. lowThesecosts characteristics
due to its nearshore
make EDS
particularly suitable for ports, where piers and breakwaters would provide a base to attach theThese
positioning, the possibility to be attached to existing structures, and the modularity. system
or characteristics
lay the foundation makeof [Link]
The energy suitable for ports,
produced could where piers and
be directly breakwaters
utilized for port would provide
operations and
a base to attach the system or lay the foundation of EDS. The energy produced could be directly
for providing electrical power to the ships while stationary (cold ironing), increasing the environmental
utilized for port operations and for providing electrical power to the ships while stationary (cold
sustainability of the port. The natural variation during the year of the available wave energy fits with
ironing), increasing the environmental sustainability of the port. The natural variation during the
the activity of the boats inside the port: most of the yearly wave energy comes from autumn to spring,
year of the available wave energy fits with the activity of the boats inside the port: most of the yearly
and this is also when more energy is required because of the dry berthing and maintenance of the
wave energy comes from autumn to spring, and this is also when more energy is required because of
boats.
the dryIn summer,
berthing when the available
and maintenance of wave energy
the boats. and the energy
In summer, when the demand
available forwave
boat energy
management
and theare
smaller,
energy demand for boat management are smaller, EDS could even be stored out of water, especiallythe
EDS could even be stored out of water, especially if it impedes the boat traffic through
port,
if itwhich
impedes is greater
the boatintraffic
the hot season.
through the port, which is greater in the hot season.

[Link]
Figure EDS concept. (a) side
concept. (a) sideview;
view;(b)
(b)top
topview.
view.

EDS
EDSisisa apoint
point absorber/terminator WEC:
absorber/terminator WEC: it isitdesigned
is designed for harnessing
for harnessing waveswaves
shortlyshortly before
before they
they
break, when their energy content is still relevant. The ideal depth is 3–10 m, depending on the seaon
break, when their energy content is still relevant. The ideal depth is 3–10 m, depending
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 4 of 17

the sea spectrum and site characteristics. Both paddle and float are “light systems”, as they are not
resonant with waves. Paddle predominately works in the direction of wave propagation, pushed
by the drag force originated by the mass transport of waves just before they break. A paddle of this
type is potentially more energetic in shallow water than in deep water. Hazlett et al. [20] tested a
similar paddle in deep water: it was a surface-piercing or half-immersed paddle that had the possibility
to translate along the wave propagation direction, pushed by the waves. They measured a maximum
CWR of 15% when the paddle was artificially driven so that it stayed on the wave crest; otherwise, CWR
did not exceed 5%. A first scale model of EDS was studied in reference [21], providing early indications
about system potentiality. In this work the EDS model has been significantly improved to make it more
realistic and the influence of several parameters on system performance has been deeply investigated.
The first part of this work deals with the description of the experimental model. Then, the results
of the experimental tests on the float-only system and on EDS are presented. Finally, the performances
of the two systems are discussed in more details, and they are compared with the ones of the the
Wavestar lab model [22].

2. Experimental Setup and Method

This part is subdivided in three sections: the first one describes the laboratory model of the EDS,
the second one describes the data processing calculation of the power absorbed by the EDS model,
and the third one describes the laboratory waves used in the experiments.

2.1. EDS Scale Model

The laboratory model of EDS is shown in Figure 2. It has been realized at 1:25 scale of the project
prototype, and it is composed of a main arm OA, which supports the float and which is pivoted at O
above the water surface. Another arm CE supports the paddle and it is pivoted in point C on the main
arm, between the pivot O and the float. The two degrees of freedom of the system are θ1 and θ2 , angles
of rotation of the float around O pivot, and of the paddle around C pivot, respectively. θ1 and θ2 are
both absolute coordinates: they express rotations around the equilibrium position of the main arm and
paddle arm respectively.
The float is composed by a hemispherical part at the bottom with radius 0.107 m and height
0.075 m, and a cylindrical upper part with diameter 0.204 m and height 0.062 m. Total height of
the float is 0.137 m. The paddle has a cylindrical shape with radius 0.104 m and a chord of 0.12 m.
The paddle width is 0.204 m. Main characteristics of the model and their uncertainties are reported
in Table 1. In order to support the float PTO, the main arm extends on the left hand side of O pivot
up to point B. Paddle PTO is placed between the paddle arm (point D) and the main arm (point F).
Both PTOs are heaving discs in not-pressurized oil (density 878 kg/mc, dynamic viscosity 0.12 Pa·s
at 20◦ ), connected through leverages to the main arm or to the paddle arm. The float-only system is
obtained by removing the paddle apparatus, which consists of the paddle, its arm (CE) and its PTO
with the leverages (DF); in this way the system turns into a one-degree-of-freedom system and it
becomes similar to the Wavestar model studied in reference [22]. With respect to the EDS model of the
previous work [21], the main improvements made in this work are:

(1) Float geometry: the shape of the float has been improved, by further rounding the basis of the
float, making it more hydrodynamic. Moreover, the new float is shorter, the cylindrical part is
shorter and the spherical part is taller. This make the new float quite similar to the one used in [22].
(2) Inertia: also related to the float geometry, the inertia of the new model is lower. This make the
new model more realistic.
(3) Paddle PTO: the new model has a dissipative system for measuring energy absorbed by the
paddle, while in the previous model the absorbed energy was estimated by the elongation of
a spring connected to the paddle. That was a conservative system, hence the absorbed energy
could not be accurately measured.
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 5 of 17
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17

Figure 2. (a) EDS scheme model; (b) EDS lab model; (c) EDS lab model, particular.
Figure 2. (a) EDS scheme model; (b) EDS lab model; (c) EDS lab model, particular.

[Link]
Table Characteristics of
of the EDS laboratory
laboratorymodel.
model.
Characteristic
Characteristic Symbol
Symbol Value
Value
Float arm length l1 [m] 0.4 ± 0.0005
Float arm length
Main arm inclination
l [m]
α [°]1 ◦
0.4 ± 0.0005
25 ± 1
Main arm inclination α[ ] 25 ± 1
Paddle height sP [m] 0.12 ± 0.0005
Paddle height sP [m] 0.12 ± 0.0005
Paddle draft dP [m] 0.09 ± 0.001
Paddle draft dP [m] 0.09 ± 0.001
Float draft dF [m] 0.06 ± 0.001
Float draft dF [m] 0.06 ± 0.001
Diameter of the float, paddle width D [m] 0.204 ± 0.0005
Diameter of the float, paddle width D [m] 0.204 ± 0.0005
Moment
Moment ofof
inertia
inertia I [kg m2] 2 0.45
0.45± ±
0.02
0.02
I [kg m ]
Hydrostatic
Hydrostatic stiffness of of
stiffness float
float k [Nm/rad]
k [Nm/rad] 3636± ±
1 1
Natural period of the float-only system
Natural period of the float-only system TN [s]
TN [s] 0.84
0.84± ±
0.01
0.01
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 6 of 17
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17

Figure 3 is3 ais schematic

Figure a schematicofofthe thePTO
PTOsystems
systemsof offloat
float and
and paddle.
paddle. TheThefloat
floatdamper
damperisisa asingle
single
heaving
heaving disc, supported by a stem that can slide through bearings. The bearings are fixed atatthe
disc, supported by a stem that can slide through bearings. The bearings are fixed the
cylinder, which
cylinder, whichis fixed to to
is fixed the ground.
the [Link]
amountof of damping was changed
damping was changedby byvarying
varyingthe
thediameter
diameter
of the heaving
of the heavingdisc.
[Link]
Thediameters
diametersofofthe
thediscs
discsused
used were
were 93, 96, 99,
99, 100
100mm;
mm;the
theinternal
internaldiameter
diameter ofof
thethe
cylinder was 104.8
cylinder was 104.8 [Link].

[Link]
Figure PTOof
offloat
float(a)
(a) and
and paddle (b).
(b).

TheThe
paddle
paddledamper
damperis similar, except
is similar, for two
except for characteristics. The first
two characteristics. Theone
firstis one
that is
thethat
stem supports
the stem
twosupports
heavingtwo discs, a porous
heaving one
discs, fixed on
a porous onethefixed
stem,onandthe another
stem, and one that can
another oneslide along
that can thealong
slide stem the
for a
stem
short for a short
distance. Thisdistance. This system
system allows allows for
for a different a different
amount amount in
of damping of the
damping
two ways in theoftwo ways
motion ofofthe
motion of the stem. Depending on the way of motion, the discs are attached
stem. Depending on the way of motion, the discs are attached together or detached and the holes of together or detached and
thethe holes
fixed of are
disc the closed
fixed disc
or are closed
freed. Theordiameter
freed. Theofdiameter
the fixedofdisc
the fixed
is 23 disc
mm,iswith
23 mm, with
eight eightofholes
holes 3 mm
of 3 mmthe
diameter; diameter;
diameter theofdiameter of theiscylinder
the cylinder 24 [Link] 24 mm.
otherThe other difference
difference between between
the float theand
floatpaddle
and
paddle PTO is that the latter reacts against the main arm in point F and not against
PTO is that the latter reacts against the main arm in point F and not against the ground. Point F is at the the ground. Point
leftFhand
is at the
sideleft
of hand
pointside of point
O (see FigureO 3)
(see
andFigure 3) and of
the length thesegment
length ofOF segment OF (see
(see Figure 2a)Figure
is 0.130 2a)±is0.005
0.130m.
± 0.005 m. A sensor distance and a load cell were placed on each PTO system,
A sensor distance and a load cell were placed on each PTO system, in order to measure the relative in order to measure the
relative motion 𝑥(𝑡) between the disc and the cylinder and the force exerted on the disc.
motion x (t) between the disc and the cylinder and the force exerted on the disc.

[Link]. Measurement
Measurement Method
Method
The distance sensors measure the relative position x1 and x2 between the stem and the cylinder
The distance sensors measure the relative position x1 and x2 between the stem and the cylinder
(x1 for the float PTO, x2 for the paddle PTO). Note that x2 measures the lengthening and shortening of
(x1 for the float PTO, x2 for the paddle PTO). Note that x2 measures the lengthening and shortening
FD, which is embedded between the main arm and the paddle arm, so it is a relative coordinate. The
of FD, which is embedded between the main arm and the paddle arm, so it is a relative coordinate.
coordinates 𝜃 and 𝜃 are calculated from the coordinates x1 and x2. The load cells measure the total
The coordinates θ1 and θ2 are calculated from the coordinates x1 and x2 . The load cells measure the
forces F1 and F2.
total forces
SinceF1the
and F2 . is periodic, all measured signals are phase-averaged taking the position of the
motion
Since the motion is periodic,
disc x1(t) as phase reference; all measured
in this signals
way the mean are phase-averaged
oscillation cycle (whose taking theisposition
duration equal toof
thethe
x1 (t)period
discwave as phase reference;
𝑇) of in this
the measured way theare
quantities mean oscillation cycle (whose duration is equal to the
derived.
wave period T) of the measured quantities are derived.
The total dynamic force 𝐹 acting on the disc can be calculated by subtracting the static forces
The total 0 acting on the disc can be calculated by subtracting the static forces
forceofFbuoyancy
(weight anddynamic
constant part of the stem and the disc) from the total measured force F
(weightThen,
and constant part offorce
the damping buoyancy
on theofdiscs
the stem andbe
Fd can theobtained
disc) fromby the total measured
subtracting force F.
the time-varying
Then, the−𝜌𝑔𝐴
buoyancy damping𝑥 and
force
theoninertia (𝑚 +F𝑚
the discs d )𝑥
can be obtained
from the by
total subtracting
dynamic 𝐹
the
force time-varying
: buoyancy
.. 0
−ρgAs x and the inertia (m + m A ) x from the total dynamic force F :
𝐹 = 𝐹 + 𝜌𝑔𝐴 𝑥 − (𝑚 + 𝑚 )𝑥 (1)
..
Fd = F 0 + ρgAs x − (m + m A ) x (1)
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 7 of 17

where ρ is the oil density, As is the wet section of the stem, m is the total mass of disc and stem, mA is
the added mass of the disc.
If x (t) is periodic and differentiable, the energy E12 dissipated by the disc between time instants
t1 and t2 where disc velocity vanishes is independent on inertia and stiffness forces, and it is:
Z t2 Z t2 Z t2
. .
E12 = Pdt ≡ Fd xdt = F 0 xdt (2)
t1 t1 t1

where P is the instantaneous power dissipated by the disc. E12 represents the mechanical energy
extracted by the float or by the paddle from the waves during the time interval included between t1
and t2 , which can be the instants that subdivide a whole cycle or the ascent and descent phases of the
cycle (nominally half-cycle). The disk added mass is equal to m A = C A m A0 , where m A0 = 31 ρD3 is
the theoretical added mass for a heaving disc in unbounded flow [23]. The coefficient C A takes into
account the confinements effects; it was calculated using the Fourier analysis, according to [23]:
Z T
1
CA = F 0 (t) sin(ωt)dt (3)
ωXπm A0 0

where X is the motion amplitude and ω = 2π/T is the motion (and wave) pulsation.
This optimization gave CA ≈ 2 for all the discs used. It must be said that the value of CA does not
affect the estimation of the energy dissipated by the disc during the oscillation cycle and during the
ascent and descent phases, but only little affects the estimation of instantaneous damping force and
dissipated power.
As an example, Figure 4 shows the phase-averaged temporal story of the heaving disc of float PTO.
Position x1 , velocity, forces and dissipated power are reported. In order to calculate the equivalent
linear damping of the PTOs, we calculated the harmonic approximations θe1 (t) and θe2 (t) of the
phase-averaged rotations of the main arm θ1ph (t) and of the paddle arm θ2ph (t) for each test.

θe1 (t) ≡ Re Θ̂1 eiωt

(4)
θe2 (t) ≡ Re Θ̂2 eiωt

The complex Fourier coefficients of the first harmonic Θ̂1 and Θ̂2 were calculated as (for simplicity
in the continuous form):
RT −iωt dt
Θ̂1 = 2T1
0 θ1ph ( t ) e
T −iωt dt
(5)
Θ̂2 = 2T1
R
0 θ2ph ( t ) e

Then, the equivalent linear torque damping b1eq and b2eq applied to the float and to the paddle are:

E1 E1
b1eq ≡ = (6)
R T .2 ωπΘ21
0 θe1 dt

E2 E2
b2eq ≡ . . 2 = (7)
Θ21 + Θ22 − 2Θ1 Θ2 cos(φ1 − φ2 )

RT ωπ
0 θe2 − θe1 dt

where Θ1 , Θ2 are the real amplitudes and φ1 , φ2 are the phases, calculated from the complex amplitudes
Θ̂1 and Θ̂2 .
Equation (7) takes into account the rotation of the main arm θ1 as well, because θ2 is an absolute
coordinate, while paddle damping is embedded between the main arm and the paddle arm. In order
to give a more realistic estimation of paddle damping, which was intentionally different in the forward
and backward phases, the subsequent expressions were used:
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 8 of 17

E2, f orth
b2eq, f orth = . . 2
(8)
1 T e
R
2 0θ2 − θe1 dt
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 17

𝐸 , E2,back
, == R .
𝑏 b2eq,back . 2
(9)
1 1 T e (9)
𝜃 − 𝜃 𝑑𝑡
2 2 0 θ2 − θ1 dt
e
where 𝐸 , and 𝐸 , are the energy dissipated in the forward and backward phases.
where E2, f orth and E2,back are the energy dissipated in the forward and backward phases.

Figure 4. Phase averaged oscillation of the heaving disc of the float. hF /D = 0.7, wave A (see Table 2),
discFigure
diameter 96 mm.
4. Phase (a) Position
averaged and
oscillation of dissipated
the heaving power; (b)float.
disc of the Forces;
hF/D(c) Velocity
= 0.7, wave Aand
(seedamping
Table 2), force.
The disc
totaldiameter
dynamic 96 force in Position
mm. (a) (b) is theandtotal measured
dissipated force
power; (b)minus
Forces;the
(c) static contributions
Velocity and damping(weight
force. and
The total
constant partdynamic force in
of buoyancy of(b)
theisdisc
the total
and measured
stem). force minus the static contributions (weight and
constant part of buoyancy of the disc and stem).
For the float PTO, four discs of different diameter were used, in order to generate a different
amount of Fordamping:
the float PTO, four discs
depending of different
on the diameter
disc diameter, were used,
equivalent in order
linear torqueto generate
damping a different
ranged from 2
amount of damping: depending on the disc diameter, equivalent linear torque
to 5 Nms/rad. For the paddle PTO, the same disc configuration was used in all tests. The equivalent damping ranged from
2 to 5 Nms/rad. For the paddle PTO, the same disc configuration was used in all tests. The equivalent
linear torque damping generated on the paddle was b2eq,forth = 0.5 Nms/rad in the forward phase and
linear torque damping generated on the paddle was b2eq,forth = 0.5 Nms/rad in the forward phase and
b2eq,back = 0.2 Nms/rad in the backward phase.
b2eq,back = 0.2 Nms/rad in the backward phase.
Tests made
Tests madeononthethe float-only
float-onlyconfiguration
configuration werewerealso
also useful
useful to quantify
to quantify the benefits
the benefits broughtbrought
by by
the paddle to the system; to make a reasonable comparison, we decided
the paddle to the system; to make a reasonable comparison, we decided to set the same mass in the to set the same mass in the
two two
configurations.
configurations. System
System mass
massis one of of
is one thethe
parameters
parametersthat
thatmost
mostaffects
affectsresponse
response motion
motion andand CWR;
moreover, it is linked
CWR; moreover, it isto the structure
linked [Link].
to the structure Hence, thethe
Hence, inertia
inertiamoment
momentaround
around O Owas
wasthethe same for
same
for the float-only
the float-only system system
and for andthe
for EDS,
the EDS,thethe latter
latter beingcalculated
being calculated considering
consideringthe thesecond
second degree
degree of
of freedom
freedom blocked blocked
(θ2 = (𝜃 θ1 , = 𝜃 ,paddle
and and paddlearm inarm in vertical
vertical position
position at rest).
at rest). Moment
Moment of inertia
of inertia I isIreported
is
reported in Table 1. Natural period TN of the float-only configuration (Table 1) was measured through
in Table 1. Natural period TN of the float-only configuration (Table 1) was measured through free
free oscillations in calm water, by giving an initial displacement to the float and then releasing it.
oscillations in calm water, by giving an initial displacement to the float and then releasing it.
2.3. Laboratory Waves
2.3. Laboratory Waves
The EDS model was tested inside the wave flume of the Hydraulics Laboratory of Politecnico di
The EDS model was tested inside the wave flume of the Hydraulics Laboratory of Politecnico di
Milano. The scheme of the wave flume is shown in Figure 5. The flume was 30 m long, 1 m wide, 0.7
Milano. The
m high scheme
and it was of the wave
equipped flume
with is shown
a piston in Figure
wavemaker. 5. Thebeach
A smooth flumewith
wasa 30 m long,
slope 1 mplaced
of 7° was wide, 0.7 m
highatand ◦
the it
endwas
of equipped
the [Link]
The awater
piston wavemaker.
depth A smooth
in the channel was thebeach with
same for allathe
slope ofh7= 0.4
tests, [Link]
at the endproperties
Wave of the channel. The water
were measured depth in the
by capacitive channel
wave gauges,was the same
without for all
the wave the tests,
energy h = 0.4 m.
converter
Wavebeing in the channel.
properties were measured by capacitive wave gauges, without the wave energy converter being
in the channel.
Energies2018,
Energies 2018,11,
11,2730
x FOR PEER REVIEW 99 of
of1717

[Link]
Figure Schemeofofthe
thewave
waveflume.
flume.

The
Themethod
method ofof Goda
Goda && Suzuki
Suzuki[24]
[24]was
wasused
usedtotoseparate
separate
thethe incident
incident andand reflected
reflected waves.
waves. The
The coefficient of reflection was similar for the three waves considered. Waves properties are reported
coefficient of reflection was similar for the three waves considered. Waves properties are reported in
inTable
Table2.2.

Table 2. Laboratory waves.

Table 2. Laboratory waves.
Incident Reflected Theoretical Experimental Incident
Wave Incident Reflected Wave Theoretical Incident Reflection
Wave Wave Wave Wave Wave Wave
Experimental Wave Reflection
Type Wave Wave Period Wave Wave Coefficient
Type Amplitude Amplitude Period Length Wave Length Power
Length Coefficient
Amplitude Amplitude Length Power
aI [mm] aR [mm] T [s] L [m] Lexp [m] PI [W/m] r [%]
aI [mm] aR [mm] T [s] Lthth[m] Lexp [m]
r [%] PI[W/m]
Wave A
Wave 24.4 1.6 1.02 1.52 1.50 2.70 6.4
Wave B 24.425.4 1.6
1.6 1.02
1.36 1.52
2.29 1.50
2.30 2.70
3.97 6.2 6.4
A
Wave C 31.7 2.1 1.20 1.92 1.91 5.45 6.8
Wave
25.4 1.6 1.36 2.29 2.30 3.97 6.2
B
Wave power per unit crest width was calculated from linear theory (see for example [25]):
Wave
31.7 2.1 1.20 1.92 1.91 5.45 6.8
C
1
PI = ρg(2a I )2 Cg (10)
8
Wave power per unit crest width was calculated from linear theory (see for example [25]):
1
where Cg is the group celerity, calculated = 𝜌𝑔(2𝑎to) the
𝑃 according 𝐶 water depth in the channel and using the (10)
dispersion relation (see for example [25]). 8
where TheCwave
g is the groupwas
length celerity, calculated according
also experimentally measured,to thethrough
water depth
cross in the channel
correlation andsignals
of the using theof
dispersion
the two wave relation
gauges. (see
In for
Tableexample [25]).
2 the theoretical and experimental values of wave length are reported.
Finally, Thethewave
capturelength
widthwas alsoCWR
ratio experimentally
of EDS wasmeasured,
calculatedthrough
as: cross correlation of the signals of
the two wave gauges. In Table 2 the theoretical and experimental values of wave length are reported.
E1 + E2
Finally, the capture width ratio CWR of EDS was Pa calculated T as:
CWR = = (11)
PI D 𝐸 +P𝐸I D
𝑃 𝑇 (11)
CWR = =
where Pa is the average power absorbed by the 𝑃 𝐷system 𝑃𝐷 and PI D is the wave power of a wave front
wherewidth
whose Pa is the average
is equal power
to the width absorbed
of the waveby the system
energy and 𝑃 𝐷 Eis1 and
converter. the wave
E2 arepower of a wave
the energy front
absorbed
bywhose width
float and is equal
paddle to the
during width
one of the wave
oscillation cycle, energy
T is theconverter.
wave period, E1 andD isEthe
2 are the diameter,
float energy absorbed
PI the
by float and paddle during one oscillation cycle, T is the wave period, D
wave power for unit crest width calculated on the basis of the incident wave height. For the float-only is the float diameter, 𝑃 the
wave power
system E2 = 0. for unit crest width calculated on the basis of the incident wave height. For the float-
only system E2 = 0.
3. Results
3. Results
Float-only system was tested first. The system was not in resonance with any of the waves tested,
because Float-only
its natural system
periodwaswas tested first. than
smaller The system
any wave wasperiods.
not in resonance
The water with anyin
level ofthe
the channel
waves tested,
was
because
the same itsfornatural
all tests,period
h = 0.4was m. smaller
The system thanwasany tested
wave periods.
at differentThedistances
water level in the
from thechannel
shorelinewas(andthe
same different
hence for all tests, h = 0.4
depths hFm. Thewith
), and system was tested
different valuesat different
of damping distances
b1 . Thefrom the shoreline
position (and hence
of the system was
different
varied depths moving,
by rigidly hF), and withalongdifferent
the channel,valuestheofstructure
dampingthat b1. The position
supports the of WECthe model
system(thewaspoints
varied
by rigidly
fixed on themoving,
structurealongare the thepivot
channel,
O and the
thestructure
cylinderthat of thesupports the WEC
float damping model In
system). (the
thepoints fixed
condition
ofonthethemaximum
structure are the pivot
proximity of Otheand the cylinder
system of thethat
to the shore floatwasdamping
tested,system).
water depth In theatcondition
the floatof wasthe
hmaximum
F = 0.12 m proximity
(h F /D = of
0.6); the
this system
was the to the
limit shore
beyond that was
which tested,
the float water
touched depth
the at the
bottom float
when was h = 0.12
oscillating
F

m (hF/D
under the=wave
0.6); this was the limit beyond which the float touched the bottom when oscillating under
tested.
the wave tested.
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 10 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17
Figures
Figures 6–8
6–8show
showthe theCWRCWRof ofthe
the float-only
float-only system,system,for forthethethree
threewaves wavesconsidered
considered (waves
(waves A, A,
B, B,
Figures 6–8
C respectively). show the CWR of water the float-only hsystem, for the three waves considered (waves A, B,
C respectively). The dimensionless water depth hFF/D is reported in the abscissa. The diameter of thethe
The dimensionless depth /D is reported in the abscissa. The diameter of
C respectively).
circles is proportional The dimensionless water depth hF/D is reportedapplied in the abscissa. The diameter of the is
circles is proportionaltotothe theequivalent
equivalentlinearlinear torque damping
torque damping applied totothe thefloat,
float, whose
whose amount
amount is
circles is proportional to the equivalent linear torque damping applied to the float, whose amount is
reported
reported in in
thethe
legend.
[Link] eachhFh/D,
Foreach F/D, different
different valuesvaluesof ofdamping
dampingforces forceswere weretested,
tested, but
but optimal
optimal
reportedwas in the legend. For each cases.
hF/D, different values /D, of damping forces wereoptimal
tested, but optimal
damping
damping was not
notreached
reachedininany any [Link] given hhFF/D,
For aa given ititcan
canbe besaid
saidthat that optimal dampingdamping waswas
damping was not reached in any cases. For a given hF/D, it can be said that optimal damping was
approximately
approximately reached
reachedififthe theuppermost
uppermost circle circle stands
stands overover both
bothaasmallersmallerand anda abigger
bigger circle,
circle, which
which
approximately reached if the uppermost circle stands over both a smaller and a bigger circle, which
means
means thatthat
the the
damping-CWR
damping-CWR trend at that
trend hF /D hshows
at that F/D showsa relative maximum;
a relative maximum; thus the thusdistance between
the distance
means that the damping-CWR trend at that hF/D shows a relative maximum; thus the distance
thebetween
circles at the circles hat/D
a given provides
a given hF/D an indication
provides about how
an indication aboutdamping
how damping affects [Link] CWR.
between the circles atF a given hF/D provides an indication about how damping affects CWR.
It It
can canbebeseen
seenthat
thatmaximum
maximumCWR CWR meanly
meanly increases
increases as as water
waterdepth depthincreases
increasesand and it it
has anan
has
It can be seen that maximum CWR meanly increases as water depth increases and it has an
oscillating
oscillating trend.
trend. ThisThis
is is reasonable
reasonable due dueto to the
the fact fact
thatthat
wave wave reflection
reflection from from
the the beach
beach causes
causes the the
wave
oscillating trend. This is reasonable due to the fact that wave reflection from the beach causes the
wave height
height to oscillate along the channel (i.e., [26]). Figure 6 shows that optimal damping for wave
wavetoheight
oscillate along the
to oscillate channel
along (i.e., [26]).
the channel (i.e.,Figure 6 shows
[26]). Figure that optimal
6 shows that optimaldamping for wave
damping A does
for wave
A does
notAvary not vary much with water depth, corresponding often to the small circles, 2–3 Nms/rad. For
does not vary much with water depth, corresponding often to the small circles, 2–3 Nms/rad. For B
much with water depth, corresponding often to the small circles, 2–3 Nms/rad. For wave
andwave B and C (Figures
C (Figures 7 and 8), the dimension of the uppermost circles (that indicates the optimal
wave B and C7 (Figures
and 8), the dimension
7 and of the uppermost
8), the dimension circles (that
of the uppermost circlesindicates the optimal
(that indicates damping)
the optimal
damping)
seems to fairlyseemsvaryto fairly
with vary vary
depth, with depth,
butdepth, but it
it is misleading: is misleading:
due todue due
the toto
factthe fact that the same range of
damping) seems to fairly with but it is misleading: thethat
fact the
thatsame
the same rangerangeof float
of
float damping was utilized for the three waves, CWR variability with respect to damping is smaller
damping was utilized
float damping for the for
was utilized threethewaves, CWR variability
three waves, CWR variability with respectwith respectto damping is smaller
to damping as T/TN
is smaller
as T/TN increases, where T is the wave period. The mean optimal damping for the three waves,
increases,
as T/TN where
increases,T iswhere
the wave T is period.
the wave The mean The
period. optimal
mean damping
optimal for the three
damping for waves,
the three obtained
waves, by
obtained by averaging the optimal damping at each hF/D, is b1eq,opt = 2.51, 3.41, 3.16 Nms/rad,
obtained the
averaging by optimal
averaging the optimal
damping at each hF /D, isatb1eq,opt
damping each =hF2.51,
/D, is3.41, b1eq,opt3.16
= 2.51,
Nms/rad, 3.41, 3.16 Nms/rad,for
respectively
respectively for waves A, B, C; this agrees with the periods of the waves, since a higher optimal
respectively
waves A, B, C; forthiswaves
agreesA, B, C;
with thethis agrees
periods of with the periods
the waves, since aofhigher the waves, optimal since a higher
damping optimal
corresponds
damping corresponds to a higher wave period, as long as T/TN > 1. Indeed, optimal damping should
damping corresponds to a higher wave period, as long as T/T
to a higher wave period, as long as T/TN > 1. Indeed, optimal damping should have a minimum N > 1. Indeed, optimal damping should and
have a minimum and CWR should have a maximum for T/TN = 1; according to this fact, CWR of the
CWRhave a minimum
should have a and CWR should
maximum for T/Thave a maximum for T/T = 1; according
N than CWR with the other two waves, on the contrary there is
= 1; according to this N fact, CWR of to
the this
systemfact, CWR
with of
wave the
A
system with wave A is on average higher
system
onisaverage with wave
higher A is
than CWR on average
with higher
the with
otherthan two CWR with the other two waves, on the contrary there
waves,
not much difference between CWR wave B and [Link] the contrary there is not much difference
is not much difference
between CWR with wave B and C. between CWR with wave B and C.

Figure 6. CWR of the float-only system as a function of float damping b1eq, water depth at the float
Figure
Figure 6. 6.
CWRCWRofofthe
thefloat-only
float-onlysystem
system as
as aa function
function of float
float damping
dampingbb1eq1eq
, water depth
, water at at
depth thethe
float
float
hF/D. Wave A.
hF/D.
hF /D. Wave
Wave A.A.

Figure
Figure 7. 7.
CWRCWR ofofthe
thefloat-only
float-onlysystem
systemas
as aa function
function of float damping
dampingbb1eq, water
, waterdepth
depthat at
thethe
float
float
Figure 7. CWR of the float-only system as a function of float damping b1eq1eq , water depth at the float
hF/D.
hF /D. Wave
Wave B.B.
hF/D. Wave B.
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, 2730 11 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

Figure 8. CWR of the float-only system as a function of float damping b1eq, water depth at the float
F/D.
hFigure Wave
Figure 8. C.
8. CWRCWR of of
thethe float-onlysystem
float-only systemas
asaafunction
function of
of float
float damping
damping bb1eq, water depth at the float
1eq , water depth at the float
h /D. Wave
hF /D. Wave C.
F C.
Figure 6 shows that the highest CWR almost always occurs with the minimum damping applied.
However, Figure
Figure it6was6 shows
showsnot thatthatthe
possible thehighest
highest
to reachCWR CWR almost always
the optimal
almost damping
always occurs with
withthe
for wave
occurs A minimum
thedue to the damping
minimum physical
damping applied.
limitation
applied.
of However,
PTO amplitude
However, it was
it was not not
and possible
the necessity
possible to reach
to reachto the
the optimal
avoid
optimal damping
the damping
float touchingfor wave
for wave A due
the channel to the
A due tobottom physical
the physical limitation
whenlimitation
hF/D was
of Again
low.
of PTO PTO amplitude
in Figure
amplitude andand6,thethenecessity
for necessity
low depths totoavoid
avoid
hF/D thethe
= 0.6float
and
float touching
hF/D = the
touching the channel
0.7, the applied
channel bottom
bottom when
whenhFhdoes
damping /D/D was not
was
F
low. Again
significantly in
affect Figure
the6, 6,
CWR for low
of the depths
float. hThishF/D = 0.6 and hF/D = 0.7, the applied damping does not
low. Again in Figure for low depths F /Dfact
= 0.6is and
less evident
hF /D = for 0.7,waves B and damping
the applied C in Figures does7 and
not
8. significantly affect the CWR of the float. This fact is less evident for waves B and C in Figures 7 and
significantly affect the CWR of the float. This fact is less evident for waves B and C in Figures 7 and 8.
8.
Then, the complete EDS system was tested. tested. Different distances between paddle and float ddP-F P-F,,
Then, the complete EDS system was tested. Different distances between paddle and float dP-F,
water depth at the float float hhFF and float external damping b1eq 1eq were
were varied
varied in the tests. The The configuration
water depth at the float hF and float external damping b1eq were varied in the tests. The configuration
of paddle PTO was the same for all the tests: two discs inside inside the cylinder
cylinder were used in order to
of paddle PTO was the same for all the tests: two discs inside the cylinder were used in order to
generate asymmetric
asymmetric damping. damping. Due Due to to the
the great
great number
number of parameters that characterizes the EDS
generate asymmetric damping. Due to the great number of parameters that characterizes the EDS
system, only some of them have been optimized in this work, while other ones, like paddle damping,
system, only some of them have been optimized in this optimized work,while
this work, whileother
otherones,ones,like like paddle
paddle damping,
damping,
willwill
be be
investigated
investigated
investigated in future
in in
future
future works.
works.
[Link] The paddle
Thepaddle immersion
paddleimmersion
immersion at at rest
at rest was d = 0.09 m in all
was ddPP= 0.09 m in all the tests;
rest was P the tests; this
this
value
valuewas wasfound
found to to
bebeoptimal
optimalininthe theprevious
previousworkwork [21].
work[21].
[21].
Figures
Figures 9–11 show CWR of the EDS system for the three
9–11 show CWR of the EDS system for the wavesA,
three waves A,B,B,C. [Link]
Notall allthethecombinations
combinations
of the
thethe
of three
three parameters
threeparameters
parameters(h (h F /D,
(hFF/D,b 1eq,
/D, bb1eq d )
, ,dP-F
1eq P-F are
dP-F reported:
) are
) are reported:
reported: we have neglected
we have
we have the
neglected
neglected configurations
the configurations
the configurations that
that were
werethat
clearly
were
clearly less
clearly efficient.
less less ForForeach
efficient.
efficient. eachwave,
For each
wave, float
wave, optimal
floatfloat damping
optimal
optimal damping of the
damping
of theofEDS
EDS
the is issimilar
EDS similar totothe
is similar the
to
oneone of
theofonethethe
of
float-only
thefloat-only
float-only system: averaging
system: averaging the best
the configurations
best
system: averaging the best configurations configurations for each
for h
each /D,h we
/D, obtain
we obtainb
hF/D, Fwe obtain b1eq,opt =1eq,opt
F b
1eq,opt = 2.17,
= 3.77,
2.17,
2.17, 3.77, 3.15 3.15
3.77,
Nms/rad
Nms/rad
3.15 Nms/rad forforwaveswaves
for A,A,
waves B,B,C.C.
A, This
B,This result
C. Thisresult suggests
suggests
result that
that float
suggests optimal
floatfloat
that optimal damping
damping
optimal dampingisisindependent
independent
is independent from
from thethe
from
presence
thepresence
presence of of
the
ofthepaddle.
thepaddle.
paddle.

Figure 9. CWR of EDS as a function of flat damping b1eq, distance between paddle and float dP-F/D,
Figure
water
Figure [Link]
9. CWRatof
CWR ofthe
EDS
EDS ashaFa/D.
float
as function offlat
flat
Red circles,
function of dP-F damping b1eq,,circles,
/D = 0.8; blue
damping b1eq distance
distance between
dP-Fbetween paddle
/D = 1.1; green anddfloat
circles
paddle and float
P-F/D d=dP-F /D,
1.4.
P-F/D,

water
Wavedepth
A. at the float h /D. Red circles, d /D = 0.8; blue circles, d /D = 1.1; green
water depth at the float hF /D. Red circles, dP-F /D = 0.8; blue circles, dP-F /D = 1.1; green circles
F P-F P-F circles dP-F/D = 1.4.
Wave
dP-F /DA.
= 1.4. Wave A.
Energies 2018, 11, x2730
FOR PEER REVIEW 1212of
of 17
17
Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

Figure 10. CWR of EDS as a function of flat damping b1eq, distance between paddle and float dP-F/D,
Figure 10. CWR CWRofofEDSEDS as as
a function of flat
a function damping
of flat dampingb1eq, distance between
b1eq , distance paddlepaddle
between and float
anddP-F /D,
float
water depth at the float hF/D. Red circles, dP-F/D = 0.8; blue circles, dP-F/D = 1.1; green circles dP-F/D = 1.4.
water
d depth
P-F /D, waterat the float
depth F/D. float
aththe Red circles,
hF /D. dRed
P-F/Dcircles,
= 0.8; blue
dP-Fcircles,
/D = 0.8;dP-Fblue
/D = 1.1; green
circles, circles
dP-F /D =d1.1;
P-F/Dgreen
= 1.4.
Wave B.
Wave B.
circles dP-F /D = 1.4. Wave B.

Figure
Figure 11.
11. CWR
CWRofof EDSEDS as as
a function of flat
a function damping
of flat dampingb1eq, distance between
b1eq , distance paddlepaddle
between and float
anddP-F /D,
float
Figure 11. CWR of EDS as a function of flat damping b1eq, distance between paddle and float dP-F/D,
water depth
dP-F /D, waterat the
depth /D. float
floatathFthe Red circles,
hF /D. dRed
P-F/Dcircles,
= 0.8; blue
dP-Fcircles, dP-F/D
/D = 0.8; = 1.1;
blue greendP-F
circles, circles
/D =dP-F/D green
1.1; = 1.4.
water depth at the float hF/D. Red circles, dP-F/D = 0.8; blue circles, dP-F/D = 1.1; green circles dP-F/D = 1.4.
Wave
circlesC.
dP-F /D = 1.4. Wave C.
Wave C.
The best configuration of EDS is almost always the one with ddP-F
The /D==0.8,
P-F/D 0.8,forforallallthe
thethree
threewaves.
waves.
ThereThe is bestappreciable
no configuration of EDS is
difference almost always
between the
is no appreciable difference between the configurations with dP-F/D
the one withwith
configurations dP-F/Dd = 0.8,
/D for1.1
= alland
the three
P-F= 1.1 and dP-F/DP-F d /D waves.
= 1.4.=Like1.4.
There is no
Likefloat-only appreciable
the float-only difference
configuration, between
the the
EDSmeanly configurations
CWR meanly with d P-F/D = 1.1 and dP-F/D = 1.4. Like
the configuration, the EDS CWR increasesincreases
as water as water
depth depth and
increases increases and it
it oscillates.
the float-only configuration, the EDS/D CWR meanly increases as water depth increases and it oscillates.
oscillates.
Again, for Again,
water depth for water < 0.8, hCWR
hF/Ddepth F <is 0.8,
lessCWR is less
sensitive to sensitive
[Link] damping.
Again, for water
These tests depth hF/D <the 0.8,performance
CWR is lessofsensitive to been
damping.
These testsrevealed
revealedthat that the performanceEDS of EDShave have improved
been improved with respect
with to the previous
respect to the
These
model [21]: tests
although revealed that
the system the performance
inertia hasinertia of EDS
been significantly have been improved
decreaseddecreased with
in order toinmake respect to the
previous model [21]: although the system has been significantly orderthe tomodel
make
previous
more model
realistic (less[21]: although
weight, the
smaller system
size), inertia
CWR has
on wave been significantly decreased in order themake
to
the model more realistic (less weight, smaller size), CWR A onandwaveC are
A andsimilar
C areorsimilar
higheror than
higher ones
than
the model
found in more
[21]. Thisrealistic
is due (less
to weight,
the smaller size),
improvements in CWR on and
structure wave A and C are
mechanics madesimilar
on or EDS
the higher than
model,
the ones found in [21]. This is due to the improvements in structure and mechanics made on the EDS
the ones
which foundainbetter
include [21]. This is due to the and
improvements in structure and mechanics made on the inEDS
model, which include abearings system
better bearings system a more
and arealistic paddlepaddle
more realistic PTO, which
PTO, in the model
which in the model [21]
model,
simply which
consisted includeof a a better
spring. bearings system and a more realistic paddle PTO, which in the model
in [21] simply consisted of a spring.
in [21] simply consisted of a spring.
4. Discussion
4. Discussion
4. Discussion
In Figure
In Figure 12 12 thethe results
results obtained
obtained withwith thethe float-only
float-only system
system are are compared
compared with with the the ones
ones of of[22],
[22],
in In Figure
which a scale12 model
the results of a obtained
similar with the
WEC, the float-only
Wavestar, system
was are compared
tested. CWR with the
against ones of [22],
dimensionless
in which a scale model of a similar WEC, the Wavestar, was tested. CWR against dimensionless wave
in which a scale model2 /gof a similar WEC, the Wavestar, was tested. CWR against r0dimensionless wave
wave frequency
frequency ω22r0/g ω is rreported,
0 is reported, for different
for different valuesvalues
of waveof wave
steepness H/L. rH/L.
steepness 0 is the
isradius
the radiusof theofwetthe
frequency
wet perimeter ω r 0 /g
of is
the reported,
float at for
rest. different
The values
present of
results wave
are steepness
shown in H/L.
terms r
of 0 is the
mean radius
CWR ± of the
standard wet
perimeter of the float at rest. The present results are shown in terms of mean CWR ± standard
perimeter along
deviation of thethe float at rest.
beach, for aaThe present
given waveresults
[Link] shown in terms
The results
results of are
of [22]
[22] mean CWR ±instandard
obtained random
deviation along the beach, for given wave frequency. The of are obtained in random
deviation along the beach, for a given wave frequency. The results of [22] are obtained
2 in random
waves, with
waves, with ω being the
ω being the wave
wave peakpeak pulsation.
pulsation. It It must
must be be said
said that,
that, for
for aa given
given ω ω2rr00/g,
/g, our
our system
system has
has
waves, with ω being the wave peak pulsation. It must be said that, for a given ω2r0/g, our system has
a slightly smaller T/TN than the one of [22]: this could bring a higher CWR for our float. Though it is
a slightly smaller T/TN than the one of [22]: this could bring a higher CWR for our float. Though it is
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 13 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 17
a slightly smaller T/TN than the one of [22]: this could bring a higher CWR for our float. Though it is
difficult
difficulttoto
difficult make
makea aaprecise
tomake precise
precise comparison,
comparison,
comparison, thethe present
present
the results
results
present of CWR
results of
of CWR are
are comparable
are comparable
CWR comparable with
with the ones
with the ones
thefound
ones
found
by by [22].
[22].by [22].
found
In
In Figure
In Figure
Figure 13 13 optimal
13 optimal damping
optimal damping
damping of of the
of the float-only
the float-only system
float-only system
system is is compared
is compared
compared withwith
with the
the one
the one found
one found by
found by [22].
by [22].
[22].
Again,
Again, our results are presented in terms of mean optimal damping ± standard deviation along the
Again, our
our results
results are
are presented
presented in
interms
terms ofofmean
mean optimal
optimal damping
damping ± standard
± standard deviation
deviationalong
along
the
beach
the
beach beach for aa agiven
for for given wave
given wave frequency.
wave frequency.
frequency. The The dimensionless
The dimensionless
dimensionless optimal optimal damping
optimaldamping
dampingwas was
was calculated
calculated as
calculated
bas
as 𝑏/ (
ext𝑏 /(𝜌𝑉/(𝜌𝑉
ρV 𝜔𝑙) , ), where
where V 𝑉is is the
the immersed
immersed volume
volume of
of the
the float
float at
at rest
rest and
and l1 isisthe
l
0 1𝜔𝑙 ), where0 𝑉 is the immersed volume of the float at rest and l11is the float arm (OA in
ωl thefloat arm
float arm(OA in
(OA
our
in
ouroursystem).
system).
system). Present
Present
Present results agree
resultsagree
results with
agreewith the
withthe ones
theones of [22]
onesofof[22] except
[22]except
exceptforfor wave
for wave
wave A.A. This
A. This disagreement
This disagreement
disagreement couldcould
could
be
be caused by the fact that we could not further decrease float damping and reach the optimal value
be caused
caused by
by the
the fact
fact that
that we
we could
could not
not further
further decrease
decrease float
float damping
damping and
and reach
reach the
the optimal
optimal value
value
due
due
due toto the
to the physical
the physical constraints
physical constraints
constraints of of the
ofthe model.
themodel.
model.

Figure 12.
12. CWR
CWRas a function
functionof wave dimensionless frequency. Wave A: H/L = 0.03;
A: H/L = wave B: H/LB:=
Figure
Figure 12. CWR asasa afunction ofof wave
wave dimensionless
dimensionless frequency.
frequency. Wave
Wave A: H/L = 0.03; 0.03; wave
wave B: H/L =
0.02;=wave
H/L 0.02;C: H/LC:
wave = 0.03.
H/L = 0.03.
0.02; wave C: H/L = 0.03.

Figure 13. Dimensionless

Dimensionlessoptimal
optimaldamping
dampingforfor
the float-only configuration. Wave A: H/L = 0.03;=wave
A: H/L
Figure
Figure 13. Dimensionless optimal damping for thethe float-only
float-only configuration.
configuration. Wave
Wave A: H/L 0.03;
= 0.03; wave
B: H/LB:=H/L
wave 0.02;=wave
0.02; C: H/LC:
wave = 0.03.
H/L = 0.03.
B: H/L = 0.02; wave C: H/L = 0.03.

For
For each wave, the best configuration of EDS was compared with the best configuration reached
For each
each wave,
wave, the
the best
best configuration
configuration of of EDS
EDS was
was compared
compared withwith the best configuration
configuration reached
reached
with
with the float-only system (Figure 14). On average, CWR of EDS is 5% (in absolute) higher thanthanthe one
with the float-only system (Figure 14). On average, CWR of EDS is 5% (in absolute) higher
the float-only system (Figure 14). On average, CWR of EDS is 5% (in absolute) higher than the the
of
onetheoffloat-only
the system;system;
float-only relatively speaking,
relatively the CWRthe
speaking, of the
CWR system
of cansystem
the increase,can with the addition
increase, with of
the
one of the float-only system; relatively speaking, the CWR of the system can increase, with the
the paddle,
addition by 10 ÷ 50% for h /D ≤ 0.8. This advantage tends to decrease as h /D increases. This is
addition of of the
the paddle,
paddle, by
by 10÷50%
F
10÷50% for
for hhFF/D
/D ≤≤ 0.8.
0.8. This
This advantage
advantage tends
tends toto decrease
F
decrease as
as hhFF/D
/D increases.
increases.
due
This to the fact that, increasingincreasing
depth, the horizontal wave force decreases and the energy captured by
This isis due
due to to the
the fact
fact that,
that, increasing depth, depth, the
the horizontal
horizontal wave
wave force
force decreases
decreases andand thethe energy
energy
the paddle
captured decreases. For h /D < 0.8, CWR of EDS is up to 1.5 times CWR of the float-only system.
captured by by the
the paddle
paddle decreases.
F
decreases. For
For hhFF/D
/D << 0.8,
0.8, CWR
CWR of of EDS
EDS isis up
up toto 1.5
1.5 times
times CWRCWR of of the
the float-
float-
only Figures
system. 15–17 show how CWR of EDS is distributed among float and paddle, for the best
only system.
configuration of EDS and float-only system, for low hF /D; furthermore, energy is split into the upward
and downward phases of the float and forward and backward phases for the paddle.
Energies 2018,
Energies 2018, 11,
11, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 14 of
14 of 17
17

Energies 2018, 11, 2730 14 of 17

Energies 2018, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17

Figure 14.
Figure 14. Comparison
Comparison between
between CWR
CWR of
of EDS
EDS and
and float
float -only
-only system
system at
at best
best configuration.
configuration.

Figures 15–17
Figures 15–17 show
show howhow CWRCWR ofof EDS
EDS isis distributed
distributed among
among float
float and
and paddle,
paddle, for
for the
the best
best
configuration of EDS and float-only system, for low h F/D; furthermore, energy is split into the upward
configuration of EDS and float-only system, for low hF/D; furthermore, energy is split into the upward
and downward
and downward phases
phases of
of the
the float
float and
and forward
forward and
and backward
backward phases
phases for
for the
the paddle.
paddle.
Figure [Link]
Figure14. Comparisonbetween
betweenCWR
CWRofofEDS
EDSand
andfloat
float-only
-onlysystem
systematatbest
bestconfiguration.
configuration.

Figures 15–17 show how CWR of EDS is distributed among float and paddle, for the best
configuration of EDS and float-only system, for low hF/D; furthermore, energy is split into the upward
and downward phases of the float and forward and backward phases for the paddle.

Figure
Figure
Figure 15.
15.15.
CWRCWR
CWR distributionamong
distribution
distribution amongfloat
among floatand
float andpaddle,
and paddle, and
paddle, and motion
motion phases
motionphases of
phasesof each
ofeach body.
eachbody. Wave
[Link] A.A.
WaveA.

Figure 15. CWR distribution among float and paddle, and motion phases of each body. Wave A.

Energies 2018, 16.

11, xCWR
FOR PEER REVIEW
distribution 15 of 17
Figure
Figure 16. CWR distributionamong
amongfloat
floatand
andpaddle,
paddle, and motion phases
and motion phasesofofeach
eachbody.
[Link]
WaveB.B.
Figure 16. CWR distribution among float and paddle, and motion phases of each body. Wave B.

Figure 16. CWR distribution among float and paddle, and motion phases of each body. Wave B.

Figure CWR
17.17.
Figure distribution
CWR distributionamong
amongfloat
floatand
and paddle,
paddle, and motion
motionphases
phasesofofeach
eachbody.
[Link]
WaveC.C.

The charts show that the energy absorbed by the paddle in the forward phase is much higher
than in the backward phase, because of the asymmetrical external damping and of the mass transport
of the waves in shallow water. For hF/D ≤ 0.9, the CWR of the paddle is 10–15%, with about 10% in
the forward phase, which is higher than the 5% found in reference [20] for a surging paddle pushed
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 15 of 17

The charts show that the energy absorbed by the paddle in the forward phase is much higher
than in the backward phase, because of the asymmetrical external damping and of the mass transport
of the waves in shallow water. For hF /D ≤ 0.9, the CWR of the paddle is 10–15%, with about 10% in
the forward phase, which is higher than the 5% found in reference [20] for a surging paddle pushed by
the waves in deep water; this is likely due to the fact that the surge wave force is higher in shallow
water than in deep water. On the contrary, the surging flap tested in reference [15] showed a CWR
significantly higher (>20%) than the EDS paddle, probably due to the fact that, in reference [15],
the damping applied to the flap was optimized.
CWR of the float in the upward and downward phase tends to be equal as water depth increases,
due the reduction of wave nonlinearity. As seen before, the presence of the paddle increases
the total CWR of EDS, though generally decreases the float CWR, with respect to the case of the
float-only system.

5. Conclusions
The behavior of two oscillating-body WECs on a sloping bottom has been investigated: a
pitching-heaving float and the EDS, an innovative multibody WEC composed by the pitching-heaving
float and a pitching-surging paddle.
The position of the WEC was found to be very influential on its performance. This is imputable to
the properties of the waves, which change as water depth changes, and to the wave reflection from the
sloping bottom: a high variation of CWR with the position of the WEC is observed. On average, CWR
of the WEC increases as water depth increases, but presents significant oscillation due to the wave
height oscillation along the wave propagation direction. This is very important in order to localize
optimal positions for a nearshore WEC.
The main parameters that characterize EDS have been investigated, and indications about its
optimal configuration have been found. EDS performances were compared with the ones of the
float-only system with the same inertia, and the results obtained show that EDS almost always has
a higher CWR. This is even more interesting, considering that the implementation of a paddle on a
system with a heaving float does not require significant changes in the supporting structure. Optimal
damping of the float is generally independent from water depth, except for water depth hF /D < 0.8,
where a wider range of damping brings a similar power production. This is valid both for the float-only
system and for the EDS: for a given system mass, optimal float damping for the float-only system and
the EDS is similar.
For the water depths tested hF /D = 0.6–1.4, EDS is more efficient than the float-only system,
more significantly in water depth hF /D = 0.6, where the CWR of EDS is about 1.5 times the CWR of
the float-only system. EDS advantage on the float-only system decreases as water depth increases,
although it is still present, at least up to hF /D = 1.4. The EDS advantage on the float-only system is due
to the fact that the energy contribution of the paddle exceeds the energy decrease of the float when
inside the EDS system.
These results confirm that EDS is particularly interesting for shallow water, and, thanks to its
structure, it is particularly suited to be docked on the external side of breakwaters of ports.
The distance between paddle and float also affects the CWR of EDS: best results were obtained
with the paddle close to the float.
The results obtained on EDS are encouraging, also because the system still has room for
improvement. In our opinion, the optimization of paddle damping in particular may further increase
the CWR of EDS.

Author Contributions: M.N. contributed in designing and developing the experimental setup, designing and
realizing the experiments, analyzing the results and writing the paper. S.M. supervised the research and
contributed in designing the experimental setup and the experiments and writing the paper.
Funding: This research was partially funded by Regione Lombardia (POR FESR 2007–2013, Azione B–Bando 2009
Efficienza Energetica).
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 16 of 17

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to remember and thank Arturo Lama, the inventor of the EDS system,
for sharing his contagious enthusiasm and supporting the project with tireless passion. Moreover, the authors
would like to thank Tecmomac s.r.l. ([Link]) for all the support provided.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. de O Falcao, A.F. Wave energy utilization: A review of the technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14,
899–918. [CrossRef]
2. López, I.; Andreu, J.; Ceballos, S.; Martinez de Alegría, I.; Kortabarria, I. Review of wave energy technologies
and the necessary power-equipment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 27, 413–434. [CrossRef]
3. Khan, N.; Kalair, A.; Abas, N.; Haider, A. Review of ocean tidal, wave and thermal energy technologies.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 72, 590–604. [CrossRef]
4. Perez-Collazo, C.; Greaves, D.; Iglesias, G. A Novel Hybrid Wind-Wave Energy Converter for Jacket-Frame
Substructures. Energies 2018, 11, 637. [CrossRef]
5. Fadaeenejad, M.; Shamsipour, R.; Rokni, S.D.; Gomes, C. New approaches in harnessing wave energy:
With special attention to small islands. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 29, 345–354. [CrossRef]
6. Roy, A.; Auger, F.; Dupriez-Robin, F.; Bourget, S.; Tran, Q.T. Electrical Power Supply of Remote Maritime
Areas: A Review of Hybrid Systems Based on Marine Renewable Energies. Energies 2018, 11, 1904. [CrossRef]
7. Folley, M.; Whittaker, T.J.T. Analysis of the nearshore wave energy resource. Renew. Energy 2009, 34,
1709–1715. [CrossRef]
8. Van Nieuwkoop-McCall, J.C.C.; Smith, H.C.M.; Edwards, K.A. Effect of water depth on the wave energy
resource and extreme wave conditions. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Ocean Energy
(ICOE 2012), Dublin, Ireland, 17–19 October 2012.
9. Vicinanza, D.; Contestabile, P.; Ferrante, V. Wave energy potential in the north-west of Sardinia (Italy).
Renew. Energy 2013, 50, 506–521. [CrossRef]
10. Morim, J.; Cartwright, N.; Etemad-Shahidi, A.; Strauss, D.; Hemer, M. A review of wave energy estimates for
nearshore shelf waters off Australia. Int. J. Mar. Energy 2014, 7, 57–70. [CrossRef]
11. Rusu, E.; Guedes Soares, C. Numerical modelling to estimate the spatial distribution of the wave energy in
the Portuguese nearshore. Renew. Energy 2009, 34, 1501–1516. [CrossRef]
12. Purandare, M.M.; Aswatha Narayana, P.A. Wave power variation in the near-shore regions. Coast. Eng. 1987,
11, 381–390. [CrossRef]
13. Belibassakis, K.; Bonovas, M.; Rusu, E. A Novel Method for Estimating Wave Energy Converter Performance
in Variable Bathymetry Regions and Applications. Energies 2018, 11, 2092. [CrossRef]
14. Silva, D.; Rusu, E.; Guedes-Soares, C. Evaluation of Various Technologies for Wave Energy Conversion in the
Portuguese Nearshore. Energies 2018, 6, 1344. [CrossRef]
15. Folley, M.; Whittaker, T.J.T.; Henry, A. The effect of water depth on the performance of a small surging wave
energy converter. Ocean Eng. 2007, 34, 1265–1274. [CrossRef]
16. Whittaker, T.J.T.; Folley, M. Nearshore oscillating wave surge converters and the development of Oyster.
Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 2012, 370, 345–364. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Hansen, R.H.; Kramer, M.M.; Vidal, E. Discrete Displacement Hydraulic Power Take-Off System for the
Wavestar Wave Energy Converter. Energies 2013, 6, 4001–4044. [CrossRef]
18. Falcão, A.F.O.; Cândido, J.J.; Justino, P.A.P.; Henriques, J.C.C. Hydrodynamics of the IPS buoy wave energy
converter including the effect of non-uniform acceleration tube cross section. Renew. Energy 2012, 41, 105–114.
[CrossRef]
19. Muliawan, M.J.; Gao, Z.; Moan, T.; Babarit, A. Analysis of a Two-Body Floating Wave Energy Converter with
Particular Focus on the Effects of Power Take-Off and Mooring Systems on Energy Capture. J. Offshore Mech.
Arct. Eng. 2013, 135. [CrossRef]
20. Hazlett, B.D.; Inculet, I.I.; Inculet, D.R. Electric power generation by “surfing” water waves. Renew. Energy
2009, 34, 2510–2514. [CrossRef]
21. Negri, M.; Clerici, F.; Malavasi, S. A breaker-zone wave energy converter. In Proceedings of the International
Conference on Renewable Energies and Power Quality (ICREPQ’13), Bilbao, Spain, 20–22 March 2013.
Energies 2018, 11, 2730 17 of 17

22. Zurkinder, A.S.; Ferri, F.; Beatty, S.; Kofoed, J.P.; Kramer, M.M. Non-linear numerical modelling and
experimental testing of a point absorber wave energy converter. Ocean Eng. 2014, 78, 11–21. [CrossRef]
23. Sarpkaya, T.; Isaacson, M. Mechanics of wave forces on offshore structures. J. Appl. Mech. 2009, 49, 466–467.
[CrossRef]
24. Goda, Y.; Suzuki, Y. Estimation of incident and reflected waves in random wave experiments. In Proceedings
of the 15th Coastal Engineering Conference, Honolulu, HI, USA, 1–17 July 1976.
25. Dean, R.G.; Dalrymple, A.R. Water Wave Mechanics for Engineers and Scientists; World Scientific Publishing
Co. Pte. Ltd.: Singapore, 1991; p. 370, ISBN 978-9810204211. Available online: [Link]
[Link]/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=1SM8DQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Water+Wave+Mechanics+
for+Engineers+and+Scientists&ots=H6H52F2eUF&sig=vV45k69GgImGHVmN6V3TmRfLKN0&redir_
esc=y#v=onepage&q=Water%20Wave%20Mechanics%20for%20Engineers%20and%20Scientists&f=false
(accessed on 24 July 2018).
26. Chang, H.-K.; Hsu, T.-W. A two-point method for estimating wave reflection over a sloping beach. Ocean Eng.
2003, 30, 1833–1847. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license ([Link]