T II II III I

NOTE

The m a x i m u m efficiency of wave-energy devices

near coast lines
D. V . EVANS
Department o f Mathematics, University o f Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TW, UK.

It is well known (Evans ~) that the maximum mean

power that N wave-energy devices, each operating in a
single degree of freedom, can absorb is

Pmax=~X*B-lX
where

B = [M,,,nl re, n = 1,2 .... N

(m = 1,2 .... N )

is the radiation damping matrix for the group of

devices, and X = {Xml is the time-independent vector
o f exciting forces on each device in the direction o f its
subsequent motion, due to the long-crested incident
wave o f radian frequency oJ.
Now it can be shown (Newman 2) that

1 [2~ X,,,(O)X,(O) dO
(1)
8XP~ Jo
where k is the incident wave length and Pw is the mean
power per unit crest length of the incident wave. Here
0 is the angle of incidence of the incident wave. For an
array o f 'point absorbers' we may approximate Xm(O)
by the value of the incident wave potential at the nlth
absorber times a constant.
Thus for a line o f N point absorbers equally spaced
a distance d apart, making an' angle 3 to the direction
o f the incident wave, it turns out that the maximum
capture width/max is given by

devices o f the type currently being considered by

Kvaerner Brug A/S off Bergen in Norway. To fix ideas
we consider an infinitely long vertical coastline making
an angle 3 to the incident waves. Then it turns out that
the reflected wave makes no contribution to the
stationary-phase arguments involved in re-deriving a
formula corresponding to (I) and appropriate to the
presence o f the coastline; the only changes needed are
that the integration is now taken from zero to 7r in (I),
and the appropriate X(O) including the reflected wave
must be used.
Thus we find that for an isolated point absorber

/max = X I ~ ( 3 ) I z

B,,, =

k/max=kPmax= L . j - t

where

Jm, = Jo [ kd(m - n) }
and

Lm = explikdm sin 31,

k = 27fix

Here Jo is the zeroth order Bessel function.

In particular if N = 1 we get the well-known result
/max = X]27r.
It is possible to generalise these results to allow for the
presence o f a coastline thus enabling estimates to be
made o f the maximum capture width o f one or more
Accepted August 1987. Discussion closes September 1988.

162

Applied Ocean Research, 1988, Iiol. 10, No. 3

Ic~(O)lZdO

(2)

where 4)(3) is the incident plus reflected potential at the

absorber due to waves approaching from an angle 3.
Notice that when dealing with point absorbers it is sufficient to use the incident potential rather than the
exciting force at the point in question.
A simple example is given by a single point absorber
a distance b from a perfectly reflecting coastline, when
we find that

lmax(kb, 3 ) = __X(1 + cos(2kb sin 3))

~(1 + Jo(kb)

(3)

reducing to/max -- X/Tr when the device is embedded in

the coastline.
These results can be generalised to any number o f
devices and to include a coastline which is not perfectly
reflecting but which absorbs a proportion of the e n e r g y
incident upon it.
If we impose the impedance condition

~y=ikp-l~

on

y=0,

we can model a partly reflecting coastline with a reflection coefficient R = - ( 1 - p sin 3)/(1 + p sin t3) which
for p > 0 models a loss of energy at the coastline. A
similar assumption has been made by Chen 3.
Thus, for example, the maximum capture width for a
single device embedded in an absorbing coastline o f this

9 1988 Computational Mechanics Publications

The maximum efficiency of wave-energy devices near coast lines: D. V. Evans

XIO-1
3~
XIO-I

18

3~I

,G

~"

n~.,,/x

''"%

b,o

14

I~.t,../,X

~2

10

:t
o

~,

'*-- "%'~

0"

11,

2s
2~

I~

lo

X sin2/3
[ .I~
sin2t
dt
/max(P'/3) = (1 + p s-~n/3) ~] -0 (1 + p sin 0 2

IG

type turns out to be

22

"

Figure 2. Variation of maximum capture width with

reflectivity of coastline for various angles of incidence.

[z~:zo"

28

"%

1%

i,t
12

'2

(4)

again reducing to known results when p = co corresponding to a totally reflecting coastline.

The general expression for an absorber a distance b
from the coastline is

lmax(p,/3, kb)= Xl(p,~,lb)/ I ~ I(p,O, kb) dO

I

where
/

I(p,/3, kb) = p2sin2/3 c~

sin/3) + 4 sin2(kb sin/3)

(1 + p sin fl)2

(5)

"]

xIo-I
30

1
,

26

1
b
/

2t

2O

~-%.,/,h

te

16

'i

Recent proposals in the UK envisage the exploitation

of naturally occurring inlets off small islands as possible
wave-power sites. To estimate the maximum absorption
width of such inlets, regarded as point absorbers, it is
sufficient to determine the incident plus scattered field at
the inlet due to the presence of the island, and then use
(2) with 7r replaced by 27r.
A simple illustration is provided by an inlet or point
absorber on a circular island. The incident plus scattered field for a wave incident upon a circular island of
radius a is easily determined and we find that
k
/max= ~ 1 S I2l T
(6)
where

S= ~,, e.(+i)'cos n(/3-~)

.=o
o~

~',~

H~(ka)

T =~-~z.aedla~(ka)l 2 c . = 2

a~,/~.

Figure 1. Variation of maxbnum capture width w#h

distance of point absorber from rigid coastline for
various angles of incidence: la) /3 = O~ lb) /3 = 30~ lc)
/3 = 90 ~

n=l

n~O

CO = 1

RESULTS
Fig. 1 shows the results of computations based on (3)
for different angles of incidence of the incoming wave.

Applied Ocean Research, 1988, Vol. 10, No. 3 163

The m a x i n m m efficiency o f wave-energy devices near coast lines: D. II. Evans

xlo -I
10

xloo- 1

3'5
e , " ,l~a.
30

2O

,\,
\\

X\

I
,t,W

,,.- ~, ..,,
-

-<._.~
,,-- =,,-,

10

,t , .l!

.,~,,. , arr

x~o-,

Figure 3a. Variation o f tnaximunl capture width ratio

with dimensionless waventnnber f o r a point absorber on
a circular island.

Figure 3b. Variation o f maxinnmz capture width ratio

with dimensionless wavenumber f o r different positions
o f the point absorber.

It is clear that the presence of the reflecting coastline can

considerably enhance the maximum capture width for
certain values of b/),.
In Fig. 2 (4) has been computed to explore the effect
of varying amounts of reflection at the coastline on a
small Kvaerner type device. It can be seen that for
angles in excess of about 45 ~ the capture width ratio is
actually increased for p finite.
Fig. 3, derived from (6), shows the effect o f a point
absorber on a circular island. It can be seen from Fig.
3(a) that the capture width ratio lies between the two
limiting results for k a = 0 , ~ as expected. Fig. 3(b)
shows the effect of varying the position o f the absorber
on the island, relative to the incident wave. The results
are as expected with the least power absorbed when the

device is in the lee of the waves. Constant water depth

has been assumed throughout.

164

Applied Ocean Research, 1988, Vol. 10, No. 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would like to thank Professor Arne Reitan
for stimulating his interest in this problem.
REFERENCES
1. Evans, D. V. Some analytic results for two and three dimensional
wave energy absorbers, in Power from Sea IVavesed. B. Count,
London (N.Y., Academic) 1980, 213-250
2. Newman, J. N. The interaction of stationary vessels with regular
waves. Proc. l lth Symp. Naval Hydrodynamics, London 1976,
491-501
3. Chen, H. S. Effect of bottom friction and boundaryabsorption on
water wave scattering, Appl. Ocean Res., 1986, 8, 99-104